CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS

FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Citation
Q. Qureshi, S, Saini, P. Basu, R. Gopal, R. Raza, Y. Jhala, 2014.
Connecting Tiger Populations for Long-term Conservation.
National Tiger Conservation Authority & Wildlife Institute of India,
Dehradun. TR2014-02.
PREFACE
India is home to over 60% of the world's tigers, currently
estimated between 1500-1900 individuals. Government of India
has shown strong commitment to conserve this iconic species
through several initiatives in the form of amendments to the
Wildlife Protection Act, creating the “National Tiger
Conservation Authority”, delineating inviolate Core Areas in
Tiger Reserves and incentivised voluntary relocation program,
among many others. These initiatives have been critical in
securing the survival of key tiger populations, the biodiversity,
and the ecosystem services of the forests they inhabit. However,
to safeguard these investments and for tiger to continue to
survive into the long-term future so as to enrich the lives of our
great-great grandchildren, it is important that these key
populations remain connected with each other. These corridors
would ensure genetic exchange through dispersal. The corridors
would also serve to guard against extinction risks caused by
environmental and man-made factors. The tiger corridors in
this report are derived form the intensive and extensive
countrywide survey and assessment of tiger, prey and habitat
assessments done in 2006 and 2010. This information is then
used to model tiger habitat suitability used as a cost surface in
GIS based algorithms of least cost pathways and circuit theory.
They serve as a first-cut information to field managers in
identifying, managing, and restoring habitat connectivity
between key tiger populations. The report is accompanied by a
software CD that displays the shape files of these corridors on
any web based mapping application so that the information can
readily be used for effective conservation management. This
report is the first in providing a map based national guide to
Field-managers and policy makers on the spatial context of tiger
corridors for guiding conservation inputs in consonance with
the development agenda of the country. India is committed to
secure the livelihoods of its citizens while simultaneously
minimizing its impact on its wildlife conservation goals. This
report provides a tool to achieve both these targets.
CONTENTS

03 06 10
PREFACE INTRODUCTION MATERIALS
AND METHODS
 14 42 164 240
SHIVALIK HILLS AND CENTRAL INDIAN WESTERN GHATS NORTH EAST HILLS
GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE AND LANDSCAPE COMPLEX
EASTERN GHATS
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

INTRODUCTION

Being at the top of the food chain and found at low densities, the Revilla and Wiegand, 2008; Lowe and Allendorf 2010). Wildlife
conservation of large carnivores is a challenge to biodiversity conservation has emphasized on two primary strategies to promote
conservation (Chapron G. et al. 2014). With their requirement of large connectivity. The first focuses on conserving areas that facilitate
home ranges, carnivores occupy vast areas to harbor viable populations movement; while the second focuses on restoring connectivity across
(Purvis et al. 2000). Since historical times, carnivores are in conflict areas that impede movement. Most connectivity analyses have focused
with humans for food and resources, often resulting in their demise on the former strategy where modeling and mapping areas important
(Gittleman et al. 2001). Several factors, such as habitat destruction and for movement are important. In the majority of conservation studies, it
excessive hunting by humans in lieu of real or perceived threat to is observed that a corridor is a continuous remnant of habitat between
people and their livestock, the use of body parts for traditional otherwise isolated habitat patches (Inglis and Underwood 1992; Beier
medicine, have extirpated many populations (Woodroffe 2000, Clark et and Noss 1998). Thus, a corridor is not merely an animal movement
al. 1996, Check 2006) while shrinking, fragmenting, and isolating most path, but also a conservation intervention (e.g., land protection,
others to varying degrees (Crooks 2002, Proctor et al. 2005). Small and restoration, and management), when applied to a portion of the
isolated such populations are prone to local extinctions (Wilcox and potential movement area between habitat patches, it achieves specific
Murphy 1985, Woodroffe and Ginsberg 1998), therefore managing them connectivity goals in landscapes that would otherwise be fragmented
in a meta-population framework (Harrison 1991, Hanski 1994) by by urban, agricultural, or industrial land uses. The phrase ''landscape
connecting through habitat corridors (Beier and Noss 1998, Noss 1987) permeability'' which suggests (1) the importance of dynamic processes,
provides individuals an opportunity to disperse, establish residency and (2) the species-specific nature of obstacles to movements, is often
reproduce, reduces the overall risk of extinction (Purvis et al. 2000, substituted for connectivity. It compels conservationists to think about
Banerjee and Jhala 2012). In comparison to other large cats, tigers the landscape (including the ''matrix'' of unprotected land) as a whole,
having relatively high K selected life history, dispersal and immigration rather than focusing on protected areas and narrow defined corridors
play a vital role in long-term viability of tiger populations (Chapron et (Forman and Godron 1986).
al. 2008). Small isolated tiger populations are likely to face extinction Studies on modeling connectivity has always focused on developing
due to demographic stochasticity, inbreeding depression (Frankham et reliable linkage designs (Beier et al. 2008) whereas less attention has
al 2002) and poaching (Chapron et al. 2008, Kenney et al. 1995). been paid to procedures for mapping regional connectivity within
Therefore, habitat connectivity is essential in sustaining regional numerous natural landscape blocks over large areas, such as a nation,
populations of tigers, as they require contiguous forest connectivity for province, or eco-region. Among the methods and metrics used for
dispersal and genetic exchange between populations (Smith 1993; analyzing connectivity, the two recent and complementary approaches
Yumnam et. al. 2014). that have gained popularity and provided important conceptual
The impacts of habitat fragmentation can be mitigated by preventing improvements for decision making in conservation planning are graphs
or reversing population isolation through connectivity conservation (Urban and Keitt 2001) and habitat availability metrics (Pascual-Hortal
(Crooks and Sanjayan 2006), which facilitates the accommodation of and Saura 2006). With intensive efforts put towards advancing the best
species to the shifts in their natural domains due to climate change way to quantify and incorporate connectivity in landscape planning,
and maintain their evolutionary potential (Crooks and Sanjayan 2006, much research work is carried out in field understanding the

6
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

underlined meta-population dynamics, focusing on patch based ecosystems throughout its range in Asia (Tilson and Seal 1987).
description of connectivity (Moilanen and Hanski 2001). Models Although widely debated (Simberloff, 1998; Caro and O'Doherty, 1999;
distinguishing between habitats of varying quality for a species are Lindenmayer and Fischer, 2003; Wiens et al., 2008), the focal species
prerequisites while estimating functional connectivity, as animals are concept is important in landscape planning for wildlife management
believed to select movement paths in the same way they choose and conservation as it allows action with incomplete knowledge,
habitat (Beier et al. 2008). Therefore a reduced ecological cost (e.g., address the conservation or management requirements of whole
mortality risk) is accounted when individuals move through favourable communities by focusing on a species subset (Lambeck, 1997). The
habitats (Rayfield et al. 2010), demonstrating the significance of high approach is widely used not only to design protected areas (e.g. Noss et
quality habitats to be more permeable to movement than low quality al., 1999; Gopal 2014) but also to plan wildlife linkages (i.e. corridor
habitats. networks for multiple species), to maintain connectivity among
Conceived as a landscape feature (Tischendorf and Fahrig 2000) and protected areas (e.g. Sanderson et al., 2002b; Rouget et al., 2006;
defined as the connectedness of habitat for a particular species (Fischer Thorne et al., 2006; Beier et al., 2008; Yumnam et. al. 2014).
and Lindenmayer 2007), connectivity can be a simple structural indices Conserving the tiger typifies the prospects and challenges inherent in
to more complex, biologically detailed, dynamic and spatially explicit the current paradigm of fragmented small populations and landscape
meta-population models (Hanski and Ovaskainen 2000, Calabrese and based conservation models in large carnivores (Dolrenry et al 2014).
Fagan 2004, Wiegand et al. 2005). Hence, measuring functional Extant tiger populations are confined to fewer than 7% of their
connectivity involves understanding the relation between structural historical range in patchily distributed habitats across a range of
characteristics of the landscape with ecological and behavioral twelve regional tiger conservation landscapes (TCLs) in southern and
characteristics of the species or community of species (Adriaensen et north-eastern Asia (Dinerstein et al. 2007). Six global priority TCLs of
al. 2003). There are several approaches available to evaluate long-term tiger conservation significance are present in the Indian
connectivity across complex landscapes, including least-cost path subcontinent alone. These Indian TCLs are important for global tiger
modeling (Adriaensen et al. 2003, Cushman et al. 2010), circuit theory recovery as they harbor over 60% of the estimated global population of
(McRae and Beier, 2007; McRae et al., 2008), other forms of network ~3,000 wild tigers (Sanderson et al. 2006, Jhala et al 2011), and >60%
analysis (Urban et al., 2009), resistant kernel modeling (Compton et al., of the global genetic variation in the species (Mondol et al. 2009). The
2007; Cushman et al., 2010b), agent-based movement (Palmer, Coulon high genetic variation seen in Indian tigers could be attributed to
and Travis, 2011), gene flow simulations (Landguth and Cushman, historically high population sizes, numbering about 50,000 individuals
2010), statistical modeling (Cushman et al., 2006; Compton et al., 2007; until c. 200 years ago, and habitat contiguity that permitted genetic
Spear et al., 2010) or empirically derived understandings from detailed exchange between the various regional tiger populations in the area
movement data (Sawyer et al., 2009; Cushman et al., 2011). (Mondol et al. 2009). Due to change in land ownership and forest use
In the light of conservation of Tiger, rigorous assessment of the policy in the mid nineteenth century during British rule and again
influence of connectivity in maintaining meta-population framework is during the early years of India's independence a century later, much of
a necessary component in planning. The tiger (Panthera tigris) acts as the forest was cleared for timber and agricultural needs (Rangarajan
a umbrella and focal species for the conservation of forested 1996, Rangarajan 2006). This change in land use combined with

INTRODUCTION 7
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

organized trophy hunting and bounty driven extermination resulted in themselves inadequate for long-term persistence (Kenney et al. 1995,
severe decline, fragmentation and isolation of tiger populations Linkie et al. 2006), either because of habitats harboring a low number
throughout India (Rangarajan 2006, Narain et al. 2005). The strong of breeding tigers, small size of the protected area and/ or ecologic
wildlife legislation (The Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972) and the isolation from other populations. High spatial genetic structuring and
launching of Project Tiger in 1973 where the tiger, the top charismatic small population size observed in today's Indian tiger populations
carnivore was used as a flagship and umbrella species for conserving dictates preserving them in a metapopulation framework wherein
the biodiversity of India's forested ecosystems marked the beginning of individual populations are connected through a permeable habitat
a new conservation era in India. Currently, within the six tiger matrix and can occasionally exchange individuals (Hanski and Gilpin
occupied landscapes of India (Jhala et al. 2008), habitat contiguity 1997). This would result in re-colonization of suitable habitat patches
varies extensively, with the best being within the Western Ghats and where tigers have become locally extinct and rescue declining local
the North East, while fragmentation is highest in the Shivalik-Gangetic populations from extinction by immigrants (Hanski 1999, Brown and
Plain and the Central Indian Landscapes (Jhala et al. 2011; Yumnam et. Kodric-Brown 1977). Understanding and managing the metapopulation
al. 2014). Most of the connecting habitats in these landscapes are not framework of extant tiger populations is an important strategy for
within the legal domain of protected areas and are often lost to ensuring their long-term conservation. Connecting tiger source
burgeoning development demands of a growing economy and attrition populations within tiger landscapes by identifying, restoring and
by human consumptive uses. conserving habitat corridors will not only enhance long-term tiger
Currently in India, the once contiguous tiger population is now conservation objective but will serve to address the need for gene flow
fragmented with source populations primarily restricted to tiger for many other biota as well.
reserves. A tiger reserve is legally mandated to designate a critical
In this document we provide a preliminary map of
core area wherein human habitation and resource extraction is not
permitted (Wildlife Protection Act 1972, amendment 2005, (The Indian minimal habitat corridors connecting source
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972). This core is surrounded by a buffer populations of tigers in India. The mapped corridors
zone, which is essentially a multiple use area, wherein conservation
objectives are to be given precedence over other land uses. Breeding
are based on least cost corridors and least resistance
populations of tigers are mostly located in the core area of tiger pathways using circuit theory. Though these models
reserves, while the buffers usually serve as population sinks (Karanth et
are based on real life data on tiger habitat suitability
al. 2005, Jhala et al. 2011a,b). The size of these tiger reserves vary
between 344 km2 to 3,150 km2 (average 1,321 km2), with tiger obtained from extensive ground surveys during the
densities ranging from about 0.1 to 20 individuals per 100 km2 (Jhala et country wide assessment of tiger status (Jhala et al
al. 2011, Jhala et al. 2011a, Walston et al. 2010). For a demographically
viable tiger population, a minimum of 20 to 25 breeding units are
2011), however, they still need site specific ground
believed to be essential (Walston et al. 2010, Chapron et al. 2008, Gopal validation for micro-adjustments. Field managers can
et al. 2010; 2014). As such, many extant tiger populations are by
use these as first cut information for their tiger

8
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

conservation plans that include landscape scale

connectivity as an important component. The corridors
shown in this report are minimal requirement.
Alternative connectivities do exist in many areas and
need to be conserved as well. Many of these
alternative connectivities are highlighted by the
resistance based connectivities (circuitscape) in this
report and need conservation attention as well. The
bottlenecks in the minimal corridors need special
attention through enhanced protection and restoration
ecology inputs. Infrastructural development within
corridors should be minimal, and whenever permitted
for larger National interests, it should include a "green
mitigation design" for ensuring that the corridor
permeability for tigers is not compromised. In the
absence of any formal maps on corridor, this report will
serve to provide this much needed information for
long-term tiger conservation.

INTRODUCTION 9
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Field Data Collection for Occupancy Analysis at every 400 m along the line transect we also sampled a plot of 20 x 2
m to record ungulate dung. Dung was visually distinguished to species
Tiger Sign Surveys (Jhala et al. 2009) and dung density for each species, wild ungulates as
The entire study area was divided into 10 km x 10 km grids. Each grid a group, and domestic livestock was computed separately. Encounter
that contained potential tiger habitat (forest) was surveyed by replicate rates of ungulates and dung density were used as indices of ungulate
search paths for tiger sign. The number of surveys per grid ranged from abundance. The number of transects within each 100 km2 grid ranged
3 to 35, and was proportional to the amount of tiger habitat within each from 1 to 74, and were proportional to the quantum of tiger habitat
grid. Each survey consisted of a 5 km search for tiger signs. Surveys within that grid. Total effort invested in transect survey was 1,79,202
were not random, but instead conducted along features that were likely km of walk in 89600 replicates.
to have tiger sign e.g. dirt roads, dry water courses, and animal trails Human Disturbance - At every 400 m along transects established for
(Jhala et al. 2011). Surveys were conducted by the local guard and a ungulate assessment a plot of 15 m radius was sampled to assess
local assistant who had intimate knowledge of the forest and were indices of human impact. Presence of (a) human/livestock trails within
trained to observe and record tiger sign in pre-designed datasheets. All the plot, and (b) sighting of humans and livestock from the plot were
encounters of tiger pugmark track sets and scats were recorded. These recorded (Jhala et al. 2009) The number of plots within a 100 km2 grid
were distinguished from those of other carnivores based on criteria ranged from 5 to 147. The total number of plots sampled across the
described by (Jhala et al. 2009 and Karanth and Nichols 2002). A total country was 4,48,000.
of 44,8005 km of search effort was invested in 89,600 replicate surveys
Remotely Sensed Variables
between December 2009-February 2010 (cold and dry season) across
the entire country to adhere with the assumption of occupancy closure Remotely sensed data that depict landscape characteristics and human
(MacKenzie et al. 2006) and have minimal influence of weather impacts were obtained from various sources and extracted at the 10 X
(rainfall) on sign detections and distribution. A total of 9309 grids were 10 km grid. Forest cover was obtained from the Forest Survey of India
sampled. (FSI 2009) that is based on IRS 1D LISS III satellite with 4 multispectral
band data at 23.5 m resolution. Normalized Differential Vegetation
Prey Assessment
Index (NDVI) information were derived from 1 km2 Advanced Very High
Within each forest beat, one or two permanent line transects of 2 to 4 Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data, acquired from the National
km in length were delineated. Each transect was walked on two or Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Television Infrared
three subsequent mornings (06:30 to 08:30 hrs) by two observers to Observation Satellite (TIROS) (http://science.nasa.gov/missions/tiros/;
record encounter rates of wild ungulates and domestic livestock. Data accessed Dec 23, 2010). Road and drainage information were obtained
on number of each species seen and the length of transect were from Digital Chart of the World (http://statisk.umb.no/ikf/gis/dcw/;
recorded to compute encounter rates of each species. In disturbed accessed Dec 20, 2010). Protected Area shape files were obtained from
forests (outside of Protected Areas) wild ungulate densities were low, the wildlife database at the Wildlife Institute of India, National Tiger
animals were shy, and difficult to record using line transects. Therefore, Conservation Authority and State Forest Departments of India. The

10
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Shuttle Radar Topography Mission has produced the most complete, Tiger site occupancy was a priori expected to be positively influenced
high-resolution digital elevation model of the earth (Rodriguez et al by a) prey abundance, and b) amount and quality of tiger habitat, and
2005). Within each 1 km2 grid, this information was used for computing negatively influenced by c) human disturbance (Jhala et al. 2011,
average elevation and the coefficient of variation of elevation used as a Karanth et al. 2011, Harihar and Pandav 2012). We tested these
measure of terrain ruggedness. Night light data was obtained from U. hypotheses by modeling variables representing these factors as
S. Air Force Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) and covariates using the logit link function in PRESENCE (MacKenzie et al.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) 2006, Hines 2006). We initially generated data on 23 site covariates that
Operational Linescan System (OLS) represented landscape and habitat features (Forest area, Core Forest
(http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/dmsp/sensors/ols.html; accessed Dec 18, area, Forest patch size, Normalized Differential Vegetation Index
2010). Density of roads (length of paved road per km2), and Euclidean (NDVI), Elevation, Ruggedness, drainage density, rainfall, distance to
distances to roads, Protected Areas and Night Lights were computed in protected area), Prey availability (Chital, Sambar, wild pig and Gaur
ArcGIS 9.3 (www.esri.com) software. encounter rates on line transect walks, and wild ungulate dung
density), human disturbance (distance to night lights, distance to
Occupancy Modeling
roads, humans and livestock encountered on transect walks,
Though sampling was done at the level of the forest beat so as to human/livestock trails within sampled plots, and livestock dung
ensure an even distribution of sampling effort across the landscape, density) that could potentially explain tiger occupancy. These
analysis was done at the scale of 9309 grids, each of size 10x10 km2. covariates were examined with exploratory data analysis for their
This grid size was chosen since it was larger than the size of an interrelationships and relationship to tiger presence (by scatter plots,
average tiger home range (Sharma et al. 2010, Karanth KU and box plots, and correlation analysis). The variables were modeled as
Sunquist ME 2000) and the size was relevant for subsequent covariates in a logit link function to model tiger occupancy in the
administrative and managerial inputs. Sign surveys of 5 km program PRESENCE available for download from
independent spatial replicates within each grid (Kendall WL and White http://www.proteus.co.nz/]. Model selection was done using AIC and
GC 2009) were modeled to address the issue of imperfect detections of model fit was assessed by comparing the actual detection histories
tiger sign using program PRESENCE (Hines 2006). Detection of tiger with simulations generated from 50,000 parametric bootstrap runs of
signs was likely to depend on the abundance of tigers within a grid the target model in PRESENCE. Models were built using prey
(Karanth et al. 2011). We first modeled the detection process by i) abundance, human disturbance and habitat quality, these were
keeping detection (P) constant across surveys, ii) P varying across evaluated against the null model and the full model by their delta AIC
surveys and iii) P as a function of tiger abundance in that grid, wherein values. A total of six models were evaluated for modeling tiger
we used average encounter rate of tiger sign as an index that occupancy and coefficient estimates for all models with delta AIC < 2
surrogated tiger abundance (Jhala et al. 2011, Karanth et al. 2011). The were averaged based on model weights (MacKenzie et al. 2006) to
model that best explained the detection process based on Akaike arrive at occupancy probability (Y ) in each grid (Yumnam et. al. 2014).
Information Criteria (AIC) was then used in all subsequent models of
tiger occupancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS 11

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Tiger Population Extents and Occupied Habitats and circuit theory (McRae et al. 2008) analyses. Least-cost pathways
(LCP) were modeled using PATHMATRIX (Ray 2005), and resistance
We used two approaches to estimate population extents and area of
pathways were modeled using CIRCUITSCAPE (McRae and Shah
occupied habitats; (i) a more conservative approach wherein we
2009). Core areas of tiger reserves were considered as "sources" or areas
considered only those grids that detected tiger sign as being occupied
of high potential from which tiger movement across paths of least
(the naïve estimate) and (ii) model inferred occupancy that corrected
resistance were modeled across the landscape. PATHMATRIX models
for detection bias and covariates in PRESENCE. Herein, landscape
several potential routes in a radiating manner from the "source" to
scale occupancy was computed by sum of cell occupancy probability
connect to another adjacent "source". It then selects a single "least cost"
values and divided by the total number of cells. Tiger habitat (forested
pathway as the best alternative. CIRCUITSCAPE models connectivity
area) in each grid was weighted by the tiger occupancy probability of
through habitat swaths, considering resistance to movement based on
that grid and summed across all grids to arrive at occupied tiger
pixel cost and corridor width (McRae et al. 2008). It provides one to
habitat for the landscape (Karanth et al 2011). All adjacent tiger sign
several potential alternatives for joining sources and helps in
detected cells were joined and were considered to be occupied by a
identifying bottlenecks within the corridors. Since Central Indian
single tiger population.
Landscape is a human dominated landscape with clearly defined and
Habitat Corridor Modeling limited forested habitat, we could overlay LCP on high resolution
Grid based tiger occupancy probability (Y ) obtained from PRESENCE Google Earth images and align them to match geographical features
was used as a measure of habitat suitability for tigers (Boyce et al. within occupancy grids, to delineate realistic corridors. These least cost
1999, MacKenzie et al. 2006). A cost surface for tiger habitat suitability corridors buffered by 1.5 km (LCC) were considered the minimal
essential corridors joining two tiger reserves.
across grids was generated as 1-Y . This was used as a resistance layer
for modeling habitat connectivity using least cost (Sawyer et al. 2011)

12
CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

MATERIALS AND METHODS 13

SHIVALIK HILLS
AND GANGETIC
PLAINS
1
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND The Shivalik Hill and Gangetic Plain landscape comprises
of Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. The entire

GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE landscape has 4 Tiger Reserves with about 351 tigers.

Figure 1.1:
Tiger Populations and
Corridors of Shivalik
and Gangetic Plain

16 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.2:
Map showing
Landscape connectivity
in Shivaliks modeled
Using CIRCUITSCAPE

THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE 17

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

CORRIDORS OF SHIVALIK RAJAJI-CORBETT

HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAINS
Kansrao-Barkot connects Rajaji National Park with Dehradun corridor faces severe bottleneck south-east of the township of Kotdwar where it
Forest Division. A narrow strip of forest west of Lal Dhang passes through agriculture and human settlements.
town connects Rajaji National Park with Jhilmil Jheel
Conservation Reserve. Highway and a canal crosses the
Figure 1.3:
corridor which need mitigation in the form of passageways to
maintain long term wildlife movement. The Chilla Range Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
(eastern Rajaji) is connected with Motichur Range (western
movement between
Rajaji) by Chilla-Motichur connectivity. This corridor is
Rajaji-Corbett as
severely impaired restricting the movement of tigers to depicted by
western Rajaji, across River Ganga. CIRCUITSCAPE model
The most used part of this region, through the Motichur Rau,
is constricted by high human habitation due to the growing
township of Haridwar on the south. To the north, a settlement
(Khand Gaon 3) housing the Tehri dam oustees is located
along with an army ammunition dump but is still potentially
viable. This portion needs to be restored through acquisition
and restorative management.
River Song flowing into the River Ganga between Raiwala
and Rishikesh forms a corridor that is heavily impacted by
human habitation and agriculture. A lot has been written on
the importance of this critical corridor for elephants as well as
other wildlife . However, there has been little progress on
ground to revive it. Important considerations for revitalizing
these corridors are: mitigation of the impact of the Delhi-
Dehradun highway and railway traffic, power canal, and Rajaji-Corbett
prevention of encroachment of the river islands in the River Habitat size 24792 Km
2

Ganga.
Source Population Rajaji and Corbett
The Rajaji-Corbett corridors comprises of two smaller
Size of Source 8-15 (Rajaji)
corridors: one through the Shivalik Hills (Lansdowne Forest
Division) and the other through the Shivalik foot-hill forests of 190-239 (Corbett)
Haridwar and Bijnore Forest Division that connects Rajaji to Protected Areas Rajaji NP
Corbett Tiger Reserve (Sonanadi Wildlife Sanctuary). Both Corbett Tiger Reserve
these corridors (more so the Bijnore forest corridor) are Jhilmil Jheel Conservation Reserve
threatened by the growing township of Kotdwar. The Bijnore
Corridors Rajaji-Corbett

18 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.4:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement Rajaji-Jhilmil
Jheel, Rajaji-Corbett
and within Rajaji (Chilla-
Motichur) overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 1.1)

RAJAJI-CORBETT 19
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Uttar Pradesh Bijnor Najibabad Kouriya 60 294 122 594
2 Najibabad Chatruwala 38 189 35 157
3 Nagina Qadarganj 60 388 67 293
4 Najibabad Haldu Khata 5 30 21 125
5 Najibabad Ramnagar 3 18 5 49
6 Najibabad Madduwala 140 818 110 609
7 Najibabad Motadhar 142 744 162 763
8 Nagina Telipara 121 550 259 1075
9 Nagina Rajpur Kot 8 22 1 1
10 Nagina Shankerpur 21 101 12 54
11 Nagina Sulema Shikohpur 45 222 42 204
12 Najibabad Rahman Nagar NA NA NA NA
13 Najibabad Sanywala NA NA NA NA
14 Uttarakhand Dehradun Rishikesh Thakurpur 55 302 71 344
15 Rishikesh Kharakmaf 974 5397 1699 8404
16 Rishikesh Kheri Khurd 293 1571 NA NA
17 Rishikesh Shyampur 679 3945 1432 7052
18 Rishikesh Mohri Mafi 328 1850 NA NA
19 Rishikesh Haripur Kalan 942 4720 2328 10367
20 Dehradun Motichur Range NA NA NA NA
21 Dehradun NA NA NA NA
Table 1.1.
22 Dehradun Pratit Nagar NA NA NA NA
Villages within the Least
23 Chakrata Raiwala NA NA NA NA
Cost Pathway Corridor
24 Garhwal Kotdwara NA NA NA NA between Rajaji-Jhilmil
25 Kotdwara Ganga Bhogpur Malla 193 934 214 1030 Jheel, Rajaji-Corbett
and within Rajaji (Chilla-
26 Kotdwara Ganga Bhogpur Talla 56 302 75 610
Motichur) as shown in
27 Kotdwara Simalna Talla 11 39 27 112 Fig. 1.4

20 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

28 Kotdwara Chaundali 43 223 43 206

29 Kotdwara Simalna Bichala 7 35 35 149
30 Kotdwara Mathana Bichala 48 227 83 356
31 Kotdwara Mathana Malla 33 149 NA NA
32 Kotdwara Mathana Talla 11 58 NA NA
33 Kotdwara Utircha 107 464 117 447
34 Kotdwara Gwirala 20 89 17 66
35 Kotdwara Kandai 90 426 91 396
36 Kotdwara Ginthala 20 61 18 66
37 Kotdwara Gandriyakhal 57 299 84 391
38 Kotdwara Balli 141 600 150 590
39 Kotdwara Edabara 13 67 5 15
40 Kotdwara Edachota NA NA NA NA
41 Kotdwara Lalpur 234 1087 415 1864
42 Kotdwara Jayadevpur 76 327 92 442
43 Kotdwara Bhupdevpur 38 186 53 274
44 Kotdwara Katal 47 195 43 157
45 Kotdwara Edamalla 8 31 6 20
46 Kotdwara Sylinga 46 208 43 185
47 Kotdwara Tachali 17 76 16 56
48 Kotdwara Dalipur 41 225 64 294
49 Kotdwara Mandevpur 34 190 45 204
50 Kotdwara Kotdwar Gaon 327 1612 188 851
51 Kotdwara Lokmaripur 146 827 190 960
52 Kotdwara Dhurwapur 198 988 320 1533
53 Kotdwara Koriya 172 866 276 1311
54 Kotdwara Gaujura 13 68 18 74

RAJAJI-CORBETT 21
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

55 Kotdwara Bhawanipur 5 17 6 33
56 Kotdwara Grastan Ganj 136 654 200 924
57 Kotdwara Jhandichaod Uttri 264 1439 422 2073
58 Kotdwara Jhandi Chaur West 319 1757 NA NA
59 Kotdwara Jamargadi Talli 51 261 59 254
60 Kotdwara Manpur 847 3751 NA NA
61 Kotdwara Padampur Sukhran 1368 6555 2406 9802
62 Kotdwara Shivpur 767 3688 1055 4889
63 Kotdwara Ratanpur 210 1116 329 1478
64 Kotdwara Lapani Walli 131 692 NA NA
65 Kotdwara Kotridhank 111 556 154 799
66 Kotdwara Harsinghpur 211 1011 406 1820
67 Kotdwara Lalpani Palli 97 512 283 1333
68 Kotdwara Saneh Palli 81 406 NA NA
69 Kotdwara Saneh Walli 42 216 NA NA
70 Kotdwara Kotdwara NA NA NA NA
71 Haridwar Hardwar Samaspur Katabarh 91 577 116 647
72 Hardwar Rasool Pur Mithi Beri 766 4324 1041 5953
73 Hardwar Peeli Parhav 249 1697 NA NA
74 Hardwar Nalo Wala 27 154 59 403
75 Hardwar Gaindikhata 351 2179 549 2817
76 Hardwar Pamrhowali NA NA NA NA

22 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.5:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Rajaji-Jilmil
Tal, Rajaji-Corbett and
within Rajaji (Chilla-
Motichur)

RAJAJI-CORBETT 23
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.6:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Rajaji-Corbett
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

24 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

CORBETT-DUDHWA

Kosi River corridor connects Corbett Tiger Reserve to the Ramnagar through the forests of Choti Haldwani and Kaladhungi upto the
Forest Division and onwards to the Forest Divisions of Terai West, Terai townships of Haldwani and Kathgodam. It is at this juncture that a
East and Haldwani. The connectivity between Corbett Tiger Reserve severe bottleneck exists across River Gola.
and the forests east of River Kosi, towards the plains, is impacted by The optimal path is through the plains section north of Kathgodam
the city of Ramnagar. Towards the north, the steeper slopes of the lower which is negotiable by elephants. However, a less impacted corridor
Himalayas make the connectivity tenuous for species like the elephant. through the hilly tracts along River Gomti is a viable option for other
Linear development of resorts and hotels along the highway from wildlife including tigers .
Ramnagar to Almora along the banks of the Kosi makes the intervening
habitat matrix hostile to movement of wildlife. Currently only two In Terai East, south-west of the township of Tanakpur (Kilpura range)
corridors remain, one to the north of Dhikala entrance to Corbett near the corridor bifurcates into two branches: the Kilpura corridor going
Garjia Temple crossing the Kosi River, and another commencing from north of Tanakpur to cross River Sharda above the barrage going into
Bijrani Gate of Corbett eastwardly to Kosi River and beyond. The Nepal (Churia Hills-Bhramgiri Forests), and the Khatima-Surai corridor
northern boundary of this southern corridor is south of the Dhikuli goes south via Khatima and Surai Range into Plilbhit connecting
village and north of River Tons . The above two corridors are the only further to Kishanpur (Dudhwa Tiger Reserve).
vital linkages for gene flow between Corbett and the eastern
populations of tigers and elephants in UP (Kishanpur and Dudhwa) and
Nepal (Suklaphanta and Bardia National Parks).
Due to the high demand and price of land within these corridors for
tourism ventures, policy and legislation need to be implemented
urgently to secure them at the earliest before development deteriorates
them further. Settlements in the northern section of the Reserve such
as Sundarkhal need to be urgently relocated.
The connectivity through the plains (Gadgadia-Terai Central) forests,
south of the city of Haldwani is now deteriorated beyond recovery due
to the growth of Lal Kuan and Haldwani infrastructure, along with Corbett-Dudhwa
agriculture and industry. The plains/foot hills corridor from east of Habitat size 24792 Km
2

Haldwani passes north of Chorgalia town through the forests of Terai

Source Population Corbett and Dudhwa-Pilibhit
East Forest Division. Though the least cost pathway defines the
corridor across the Shivalik Hills in the East Terai Forest Division, the Size of Source 190-239 (Corbett)
forests in the terai belt (plains) that are currently fragmented patches 106-118 (Dudhwa-Kheri-Pilibhit)
are extremely important for movement of elephants that are unlikely to Protected Areas Corbett Tiger Reserve
use the Shivalik corridor. The Nihil-Bhakra corridor north of Kamala and
Dudhwa Tiger Reserve
Kaladhungi is important for tiger movement.
Pilibhit Tiger Reserve
Gola River corridor comprises of the north Kosi and south Kosi corridors
Corridors Corbett -Dudhwa
that connect south west of Rampur village and continue eastwards

CORBETT-DUDHWA 25
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.7:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Corbett-Dudhwa as
depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

26 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.8:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Corbett-Dudhwa
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 1.2)

CORBETT-DUDHWA 27
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Uttarakhand Champawat Champawat Devidhura (dechmar) 172 691 NA NA
2 Champawat Sagaun 46 267 46 265
3 Champawat Kapherti 16 76 NA NA
4 Champawat Timla Guth 30 169 42 218
5 Champawat Kumaiya Guth 8 52 NA NA
6 Champawat Bungra Dungra Pipal 10 88 15 88
7 Champawat Buram 53 296 60 351
8 Champawat Kotna 39 215 55 277
9 Champawat Amauli 91 465 100 608
10 Champawat Dungra Kot 68 333 71 405
11 Champawat Gegi Bashan 25 148 NA NA
12 Champawat Kanikot 149 834 192 1058
13 Champawat Bans Balwari 104 542 NA NA
14 Champawat Sharda Range NA NA NA NA
15 Uttar Pradesh Kheri Nighasan Sureya Para 93 864 133 1124
16 Nighasan Pateda 4 18 3 18
17 Nighasan Ghola 365 2416 497 2913
18 Nighasan Visen Puri Colony 354 2443 575 3033
19 Nighasan Bahadur Nagar 51 307 68 350
20 Nighasan Bhasuri 82 474 113 530
21 Nighasan Tulli 13 50 15 63
22 Nighasan Ebrahim Puri Colony 323 2431 558 2993
23 Nighasan Vikram Van 62 475 73 399
24 Nighasan Gadeneya 423 2417 560 3585
25 Nighasan Suhela 3 11 1 1
26 Nighasan Badaiya Khera 28 143 29 172
27 Nighasan Paduwa 291 1746 425 2209
28 Gola Gokaran Nath Kisunpur 162 1112 261 1335 Table 1.2:

29 Nighasan Niranjan Pur NA NA NA NA Villages within the Least

Cost Pathway Corridor
30 Nighasan Madan Pur NA NA NA NA
between Corbett-
31 Gola Gokaran Nath Khamaria NA NA NA NA Dudhwa as shown in
32 Gola Gokaran Nath Newasi NA NA NA NA Fig. 1.8

28 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

33 Gola Gokaran Nath Girda NA NA NA NA

34 Nighasan Paras Pur 89 498 432 1854
35 Nighasan Bhan Puri Colony 632 4637 858 5325
36 Nighasan Govind Naga Colony 356 2799 365 2245
37 Gola Gokaran Nath Ellenganj 147 903 227 1090
38 Nighasan Bajpur 81 421 108 497
39 Nighasan Bam Nagar 173 964 213 1089
40 Nighasan Mahag Pur 270 1707 438 2277
41 Nighasan Lagdahan 200 1182 249 1438
42 Gola Gokaran Nath Canp 184 1149 412 2200
43 Gola Gokaran Nath Grantno1 165 969 75 333
44 Gola Gokaran Nath Pasiyan Pur NA NA NA NA
45 Nighasan Gori Fanta NA NA NA NA
46 Nighasan Dudhauwa NA NA NA NA
47 Uttarakhand Nainital Haldwani Chukam 63 314 84 444
48 Haldwani Dhikuli 198 1020 269 1344
49 Haldwani Ladwachaur 86 467 118 623
50 Haldwani Neripura 8 46 10 58
51 Nainital Kheraula Pandey 40 251 43 225
52 Haldwani Laduwarao 7 37 1 8
53 Haldwani Pauvalgarh 137 751 177 960
54 Haldwani Mankandpur 181 967 192 943
55 Haldwani Harisinghpur Urf 7 34 9 51
Lachchhampur
56 Nainital Baniya 17 95 27 191
57 Nainital Moti Bang 5 17 4 17
58 Nainital Harinagar Chanddeva 39 238 40 256
59 Nainital Salri 89 488 102 546
60 Dhari Bhauvasa 114 580 119 680
61 Haldwani Chhoti Haldwani 102 531 148 779
62 Nainital Anrori 7 32 5 27
63 Nainital Purani Haat 25 133 31 162

CORBETT-DUDHWA 29
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

64 Haldwani Basani 121 616 131 684

65 Nainital Duhra 30 161 31 178
66 Nainital Amritpur 417 1922 350 1480
67 Nainital Amiya 101 535 118 598
68 Nainital Hairi 23 132 20 113
69 Nainital Ranibagh 387 1918 463 2066
70 Nainital Balueti 7 39 27 147
71 Haldwani Chausala 46 287 73 362
72 Haldwani Meetha Anwala 29 161 37 197
73 Nainital Bhadueni 32 174 39 181
74 Nainital Pasauli 86 488 107 539
75 Nainital Rausil 166 952 196 996
76 Haldwani Harigarh Dalipsingh 92 472 150 697
77 Nainital Gumalgaon 27 189 31 183
78 Haldwani Beora 85 418 NA NA
79 Haldwani Korta 30 120 13 39
80 Haldwani Damua Dhunga 249 1232 NA NA
Bandobasti
81 Nainital Mursele 13 75 15 89
82 Nainital Baret Talla 27 133 38 216
83 Haldwani Dewala Talla 142 850 188 1004
84 Nainital Paniya Mahtar 37 239 43 244
85 Haldwani Damua Dhunga Kham 254 1291 121 565
86 Dhari Pashtola 59 350 73 401
87 Haldwani Bamori Malli 490 2283 874 3751
88 Nainital Paniya Bor 21 112 22 115
89 Nainital Sirori 16 96 16 79
90 Dhari Baura 2 11 NA NA
91 Nainital Khamari 18 100 14 71
92 Nainital Ganrar 7 46 6 53
93 Dhari Uduwa 46 331 53 399
94 Nainital Okhal Dunga 62 350 59 332

30 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

95 Haldwani Khera 438 2671 688 3589

96 Nainital Murkariya 97 619 95 600
97 Nainital Dungsira 4 21 7 35
98 Nainital Dida 7 42 7 37
99 Nainital Gaga 30 185 21 137
100 Haldwani Nawar Khera 175 1108 259 1398
101 Nainital Baret Malla 26 157 16 107
102 Haldwani Kishan Nagri 25 124 44 230
103 Nainital Suera 50 302 58 352
104 Haldwani Vijaipur 38 278 68 353
105 Dhari Kaunta 92 528 85 476
106 Haldwani Dewala Malla 94 565 153 804
107 Dhari Patrani 93 653 112 799
108 Haldwani Dewalamalla Simlar 26 159 33 154
109 Haldwani Dewla Talla Pajaya 84 467 91 563
110 Haldwani Nayagaon Sambal 60 356 67 333
111 Haldwani Kunwarpur 90 529 122 699
112 Haldwani Himmatpur Nakayal 35 197 67 317
113 Haldwani Gajepur 35 236 63 327
114 Haldwani Nayagaon Mehra 45 271 57 322
115 Dhari Kakore 112 741 141 895
116 Haldwani Lachhampur 173 1016 220 1196
117 Haldwani Selabhawar Triloksingh 29 138 31 163
118 Haldwani Himmatpur Golapar 28 171 37 214
119 Haldwani Jwala Pokhri 38 240 45 247
120 Haldwani Lakhanpur 36 211 50 251
121 Haldwani Kishanpur Rekwal 75 454 72 409
122 Haldwani Kaladhungi NA NA NA NA
123 Haldwani Haldwani-Cum- NA NA NA NA
Kathgodam
124 Haldwani Daulatpur 25 163 37 196
125 Haldwani Sundarpur Rekwal 42 239 45 240

CORBETT-DUDHWA 31
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

126 Haldwani Gangapur 22 164 32 226

127 Haldwani Jeetpur Rekwal 25 177 34 189
128 Haldwani Padampur Rekuni 24 172 30 169
129 Haldwani Devpur Pokhriya 29 182 46 220
130 Haldwani Lakhan Mandi 110 581 133 687
131 Haldwani Malla Pachauliya 90 454 113 545
132 Uttar Pradesh Pilibhit Puranpur Majhara Bagha 60 415 61 462
133 Puranpur Ramnagra 195 1083 207 991
134 Puranpur Dhakia T. Maharajpur 207 1131 148 898
135 Puranpur Kanjia Singhpur Bhatia 247 1312 270 1440
136 Puranpur Selha 348 1942 409 2285
137 Puranpur Bandarbojh 184 1018 219 1349
138 Puranpur Naujalha Naktaha 569 3570 743 3843
139 Puranpur Bodi Bhoor 284 2018 415 2564
140 Puranpur Maharajpur 511 3101 637 3390
141 Puranpur Lagabhaga 3 7 1 96
142 Puranpur Bhoora Gorakh Dibbi 111 693 117 668
143 Puranpur Nagria Khurd Kalan 187 948 217 1121
144 Puranpur Gunhan 18 96 8 30
145 Puranpur Manpur Tilhar NA NA NA NA
146 Puranpur Dhar Bargada NA NA NA NA
147 Puranpur Bijauri Khurd Kalan 7 39 4 23
148 Puranpur Bharari 10 51 12 68
149 Puranpur Murainia Gandhi Nagar 241 1696 363 2242
150 Puranpur Bamanpura Bhagirath 525 3042 873 4520
151 Puranpur Majhara T.maharajpur 164 1082 173 1169
152 Puranpur Birkhera T. Maharajpur NA NA NA NA
153 Puranpur Sungarhi NA NA NA NA
154 Puranpur Chandpura Tarai NA NA NA NA
155 Puranpur Bailaha 593 3286 310 1554
156 Puranpur Ramkot 30 173 75 420
157 Puranpur Pachpera T. Maharajpur 109 753 175 977

32 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

158 Puranpur Rajpur T. Maharajpur 141 825 210 1129

159 Puranpur Simra T. Maharajpur 138 744 167 943
160 Puranpur Faijullaganj 68 479 144 797
161 Puranpur Maini Gulria 83 513 103 528
162 Puranpur Shastri Nagar 161 1066 150 901
163 Puranpur Barua Kuthara 46 346 87 485
164 Puranpur Laihari 64 402 87 451
165 Puranpur Ashok Nagar 169 1041 272 1319
166 Puranpur Bharatpur 431 2863 513 2859
167 Puranpur Siddhnagar 221 1545 198 1150
168 Puranpur Chandia Hajara 1363 7360 1590 8477
169 Puranpur Katakwara NA NA NA NA
170 Puranpur Musepur 18 176 35 209
171 Puranpur Shanti Nagar 205 1371 257 1684
172 Puranpur Ramnagar 565 3986 728 4912
173 Puranpur Khirkia Bargadia 328 1624 216 1324
174 Puranpur Kabeerganj 715 4248 910 4801
175 Puranpur Azad Nagar 1 5 1 1
176 Puranpur Grant No21 Urf 469 2789 620 3678
Dhakkachat
177 Puranpur Kuthia Gudia 228 1468 349 1785
178 Puranpur Harrapur NA NA NA NA
179 Puranpur Nehrosa 415 2648 520 3203
180 Puranpur Bharara NA NA NA NA
181 Puranpur Mustafabad NA NA NA NA
182 Puranpur Sampurn Nagar NA NA NA NA
183 Puranpur Barahi NA NA NA NA
184 Uttarakhand Udham Singh Khatima Jhan Kaieya 287 1581 503 2724
Nagar
185 Khatima Khetal Sanda Mustnagar 463 2703 586 2949
186 Khatima Bilheeri 491 2632 NA NA
187 Khatima Unchi Mahuwar 251 1540 439 2308

CORBETT-DUDHWA 33
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

188 Khatima Gosu Kuwan 167 1064 NA NA

189 Khatima Mudai 318 1898 NA NA
190 Khatima Amaun 851 4299 1544 7233
191 Khatima Sarada Sagar Jhau Parasa 42 256 65 324

34 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.9:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Corbett-
Dudhwa

CORBETT-DUDHWA 35
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.10:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Corbett-
Dudhwa landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

36 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

DUDHWA-KISHANPUR-KATARNIAGHAT

Figure 1.11: The connectivity between Dudhwa-Kishapur Wildlife

Potential habitat Sanctuary and River Sharda is highly fragmented with oxbow
connectivity for tiger lakes and forest fragments in a primarily agricultural matrix
movement between (sugarcane). To the north, it is connected to the Churia hill
Dudhwa-Kishanpur- forests of Nepal through a riverine corridor while to the west
Katarniaghat as river channels and forest patches connect it to Suklaphanta
depicted by .River Mohana acts as a corridor connecting Dudhwa to
CIRCUITSCAPE model Katerniaghat in the east and to Bardia National Park of Nepal
in the north.
The Dudhwa-Katerniaghat corridor along River Mohana has
been greatly deforested and needs to be restored to allow
movement of wildlife. The other important corridors in this
region, essential for movement of animals between Nepal and
India are the Basantha and Khata corridors. The Khata
corridor along River Girwa also connects Katerniaghat to
Bardia and is often used by elephants, tigers, and rhinos. The
river channels in this landscape are also a conduit for the
movement of gharials, crocodiles and Gangetic dolphins.
While connectivity between Dudhwa-Katerniaghat-Suhelwa
and Sohagibarwa on the Indian side is almost non-existent,
forests along the Nepal terai connect these areas.
The other important forested area in the State is Pilibhit Tiger
Reserve which is connected to the Corbett Tiger Reserve in
the north-west by the Surai Range and to Suklaphanta
National Park in Nepal to the north-east via forests of Lagga-
Bagga .It forms a continuous narrow corridor along the Dudwa-Katarniaghat
Sharda canal that stretches south-east into Kishanpur Wildlife Habitat size 24792 Km
2

Sanctuary. This corridor is well used by tigers forming a

Source Population Dudhwa and Katarniaghat
contiguous population from Surai Range in Uttarakhand to
Pilibhit and Kishanpur. Size of Source 106-118 (Dudhwa-Kheri-Pilibhit)
Protected Areas Dudhwa
Kisanpur
Katarnaighat
Corridors Dudhwa-Katarniaghat

DUDHWA-KISHANPUR-KATARNIAGHAT 37
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.12:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Dudhwa-Kishanpur-
Katarniaghat overlaid
by village map (the
village numbers are
referenced in Table 1.3)

38 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

1 Bahraich Nanpara Bharthapur 75 441 94 490

2 Motipur Range 43 106 0 0
3 Bandariya Gauri No.1 0 0 0 0
4 Charda Range 0 0 0 0
5 Bandariya Gauri No.2 0 0 0 0
6 Sureya Para 93 864 133 1124
7 Kadeya 451 2412 611 2924
8 Banveer Pur 668 4297 1101 5578
9 Barsola Kalan 744 4142 1141 6172
10 Indra Nagar 67 484 165 804
11 Bela Parsuwa 498 3247 709 4848
12 Ram Nagar Sankalpa 117 727 19 89
13 Surat Nagar 380 2528 729 3812
14 Raghu Nagar 43 277 79 488
15 Kisun Nagar 48 284 59 406
16 Deep Nagar 89 510 87 453
17 Ran Nagar 215 1207 283 1499
18 Ganga Nagar 225 1319 288 1599
Table 1.3:
19 Anup Nagar 67 353 19 90
Villages within the Least
Cost Pathway Corridor 20 Gori Fanta 0 0 0 0
between Corbett- 21 Dudhauwa 0 0 0 0
Dudhwa as shown in
Fig. 1.12 22 Uttar Pradesh Kheri Nanpara 0 0 0 0

DUDHWA-KISHANPUR-KATARNIAGHAT 39
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.13:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Dudhwa-
Kisanpur-Katarniyaghat

40 THE SHIVALIK HILLS AND GANGETIC PLAIN LANDSCAPE

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 1.14:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Dudhwa-
Kishanpur-Katarniaghat
Corridor landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

DUDHWA-KISHANPUR-KATARNIAGHAT 41
CENTRAL INDIAN
LANDSCAPE AND
EASTERN GHATS
2
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE The Central Indian Landscape encompasses a large land mass covering
Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha,
Rajasthan and parts of Andhra Pradesh. The landscape harbors about 601

AND EASTERN GHATS number of tigers in 19 tiger reserves and several other protected areas.

Figure 2.1:
Tiger Populations and
Corridors of Central
India

44 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.2:
Map showing
Landscape connectivity
in Central India
modeled Using
CIRCUITSCAPE

CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS 45

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

CORRIDORS OF CENTRAL RANTHAMBORE-KUNO-MADHAV

NATIONAL PARK
INDIAN LANDSCAPE
The only source of tigers in this landscape is Ranthambore NP. Figure 2.3:
Kailadevi, Kuno, shivpur forest, Madhav National Park (NP) Potential habitat
and Mukundra Hills Tiger Reserve (TR) are currently sink connectivity for tiger
habitats. Given the size of this landscape with good habitat movement between
the region holds promise for future increase in tiger Ramthambore-Kuno-
occupancy and numbers .This enhancement can happen only Madhav National Park
if the connecting corridors mentioned herein remain intact as depicted by
and functional. The crucial elements which need special CIRCUITSCAPE model
attention are 1) curbing of development along the banks of
the river Chambal especially protecting forest patches that
are on the river banks. 2) a pinch point in the corridor is where
highway number SH-23 crosses the river Kuno. This area
needs attention and mitigation in the form of smart green
infrastructure so that the road, railway and canal system
along with urban sprawl does not become a barrier to wildlife
movement.3) Revitalization of Kaildevi WLS by relocation of
villages, reduction of livestock and enhancement of prey
would enhance the importance of Ranthambore TR as a
source and increase the carrying capacity of the region for
tigers. Kailadevi would also serve as staging ground for
dispersal eastwards into shivpur.

Ranthambore-Kuno-Shivpuri-Madhav

Habitat size 9173 Km2

Source Population Ranthambore Tiger Reserve
Size of Source 30-32
Protected Areas Ranthambore
Kuno-Shivpuri WLS
Madhav NP
Corridors Ranthambore-Kuno
Kuno-Madhav
Ranthambore-Mukundhara Hills

46 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.4:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Ranthambore-Kuno-
Madhav National Park
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 1.1)

RANTHAMBORE-KUNO-MADHAV NATIONAL PARK 47

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Madhya Pradesh Sheopur Vijaypur Jimarchha 173 1348 326 1713
2 Vijaypur Harkul 140 824 204 891
3 Vijaypur Badagaon 271 1654 523 2102
4 Vijaypur Dhobini 90 500 126 587
5 Vijaypur Syarda 337 2100 614 2912
6 Vijaypur Gohar 280 1851 509 2205
7 Vijaypur Gaswani 577 3410 937 4038
8 Vijaypur Nitanwas (bijaipur) 282 1580 443 2009
9 Vijaypur Silpari NA NA NA NA
10 Vijaypur Pancho 527 3097 919 3731
11 Vijaypur Birpur 783 4920 1352 6165
12 Vijaypur Nadigaon 240 1764 450 2221
13 Vijaypur Milawali 124 673 199 819
14 Vijaypur Kheroda Khurd 73 516 110 587
15 Vijaypur Kheroda Kalan 103 545 179 709
16 Vijaypur Sudhara 292 1541 493 1964
17 Vijaypur Baroda Khurd 71 469 155 607
18 Vijaypur Basantpura 50 195 NA NA
19 Vijaypur Lakshamanpura (dhodar) 32 203 55 272
20 Vijaypur Binega 55 343 101 485
21 Vijaypur Kinnapura 94 775 231 1114
22 Vijaypur Rawatpura 65 346 98 419
23 Vijaypur Kishanpura 48 284 345 1574
24 Vijaypur Mahuamar 72 472 115 586
25 Vijaypur Sehula 75 458 132 559
26 Vijaypur Khurka 105 628 154 698
27 Vijaypur Enta 65 477 128 613 Table 2.1:

28 Vijaypur Hullpur 238 1548 335 1667 Villages within the Least
Cost Pathway Corridor
29 Vijaypur Sarangpur 172 1004 275 1201 between Ranthambore-
30 Vijaypur Dongarpur (gaswani) 83 487 121 574 Kuno-Madhav National
31 Vijaypur Paira 165 806 NA NA Park as shown in
Fig.2.4
32 Vijaypur Raghunathpur 759 4760 1131 5621

48 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
33 Vijaypur Sumrera 503 3030 814 3568
34 Vijaypur Kathon 391 2537 690 3035
35 Vijaypur Khadi F.2 95 771 131 676
36 Vijaypur Amarpura NA NA NA NA
37 Vijaypur Lalaiyapura NA NA NA NA
38 Vijaypur Deopur NA NA NA NA
39 Vijaypur Imalia NA NA NA NA
40 Vijaypur Ransinghpura NA NA NA NA
41 Vijaypur Tadawali NA NA NA NA
42 Vijaypur Todi NA NA NA NA
43 Vijaypur Gilai NA NA NA NA
44 Vijaypur Arrodari 299 1779 512 2217
45 Shivpuri Pohari Bhilodi 182 1120 320 1416
46 Pohari Umari 78 460 153 579
47 Pohari Basai 36 191 90 373
48 Pohari Gohara 50 262 74 357
49 Shivpuri Nirmani 76 536 172 764
50 Pohari Raiyan 100 611 185 750
51 Pohari Raghunathpura 26 151 53 204
52 Shivpuri Karyara 10 62 12 41
53 Pohari Kemai 142 795 222 968
54 Shivpuri Padar Kheda 210 1096 277 1370
55 Shivpuri Sujiyapura 3 21 7 22
56 Shivpuri Khanda 9 48 NA NA
57 Pohari Beharda 47 264 89 334
58 Shivpuri Mudkheda Dholagarh 71 418 108 485
59 Shivpuri Gopalpur 379 2296 507 2815
60 Shivpuri Khalara 24 127 30 169
61 Shivpuri Imaliya Gopalpur 33 219 55 284
62 Shivpuri Bilu Khoh 54 379 89 433
63 Shivpuri Rampur 11 78 19 99
64 Shivpuri Jamonia 68 402 109 632

RANTHAMBORE-KUNO-MADHAV NATIONAL PARK 49

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
65 Pohari Hanumanta NA NA NA NA
66 Pohari Imlipura NA NA NA NA
67 Shivpuri Narshingpur F.v 1 NA NA NA NA
68 Pohari Ummedpura NA NA NA NA
69 Shivpuri Golarka NA NA NA NA
70 Shivpuri Kansarai F.3 NA NA NA NA
71 Pohari Godha NA NA NA NA
72 Shivpuri Satkiwadi F.4 NA NA NA NA
73 Pohari Karkhaua NA NA NA NA
74 Morena Joura Baghebar 93 456 126 605
75 Kailaras Thathipura 229 1377 309 1599
76 Kailaras Beharara Gagir 343 2042 470 2375
77 Kailaras Golhari 436 2738 722 3219
78 Joura Bahrai Upari 26 176 58 221
79 Joura Jajipura 9 81 30 152
80 Joura Manpur 98 532 107 622
81 Joura Pali 7 44 37 227
82 Joura Birkhapura 37 279 62 351
83 Joura Ratki 4 37 16 62
84 Joura Rakehara 40 350 58 482
85 Joura Jaderu 105 614 183 890
86 Joura Dhobini 88 494 178 827
87 Joura Hariyapura NA NA NA NA
88 Joura Barai Kote NA NA NA NA
89 Joura Umari NA NA NA NA
90 Rajasthan Karuali Sapotra Kased 331 2370 541 2957
91 Sapotra Simora 111 920 NA NA
92 Madhya Pradesh Gwalior Grid Basota 19 135 27 149
93 Grid Bagwalagaon 76 637 125 700
94 Grid Badagaonjagir 437 2781 722 3298

50 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.5:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Ranthambore-Kuno-
Madhav National Park

RANTHAMBORE-KUNO-MADHAV NATIONAL PARK 51

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.6:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the
Ranthambore-Kuno-
Madhav National Park
Corridor landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

52 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

BANDHAVGARH-ACHANAKMAR

Figure 2.7: This corridor connects two very important

Potential habitat sub-landscapes, the Kanha-Pench population
connectivity for tiger with Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-Dubri populations.
movement between However, the corridor passes through tiger
Bandhavgarh- hostile landscape since some communities
Achanakmar as living in the vicinity are known for their
depicted by poaching tendencies. The habitat through
CIRCUITSCAPE model which the corridor passes is itself narrow
ridge-top forest with high biotic pressures.
Further, due to availability of coal in this
landscape matrix there is ever present
pressure from infrastructure development
associated with coal mining. This corridor
requires serious attention for restoration in
terms of ecology as well as socio-economic
inputs.

Bandhavgarh-Achanakmar
Habitat size 19111 Sq. Km2
Source Population Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserve
Size of Source 47-71
Protected Areas Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserve
Achanakmar Tiger Reserve
Corridors Achanakmar-Bhandhavgarh

BANDHAVGARH-ACHANAKMAR 53
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.8:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Bandhavgarh-
Achanakmar overlaid
with village map (the
village numbers are
referenced in Table 2.2)

54 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

1 Chhattisgarh Bilaspur Pendraroad Tawardabra 87 413 128 476

2 Pendraroad Salheghori 236 1083 297 1270
3 Pendraroad Karngara 59 252 133 468
4 Pendraroad Bedkhadera 34 167 19 66
5 Pendraroad Jhagra Khand 282 1284 392 1560
6 Pendraroad Choktipani 260 1272 384 1641
7 Pendraroad Thengadand 204 924 308 1096
8 Pendraroad Thandpathra 160 780 239 899
9 Pendraroad Kewchi 292 1200 423 1470
10 Kota Tatidhar 297 1185 402 1400
11 Lormi F.22 Kuba 13 49 NA NA
12 Madhya Pradesh Umaria Bandhogarh Sans 78 345 98 435
13 Bandhogarh Parsaura 75 391 101 496
14 Bandhogarh Jamuhai 102 457 132 548
15 Bandhogarh Beli 162 770 220 965
16 Bandhogarh Baghannara 78 386 101 435
17 Bandhogarh Ramsohara NA NA NA NA
18 Bandhogarh Karkati 138 670 160 736
19 Bandhogarh Raugarh 194 975 238 1048
20 Bandhogarh Panwari 18 86 23 95
21 Bandhogarh Mudkatiya NA NA NA NA
22 Bandhogarh Ghun Ghuti 412 1880 541 2088
23 Bandhogarh Githauri 74 388 78 308
24 Bandhogarh Chandpur 136 653 183 762

Table 2.2: 25 Bandhogarh Barhai 147 719 214 853

Villages Within the 26 Bandhogarh Audhera 191 1031 273 1198

Least Cost Pathway 27 Bandhogarh Malachua 228 1182 320 1355
Corridor between
28 Bandhogarh Kachodar 123 534 165 651
Bandhavgarh-
Achanakmar as shown 29 Bandhogarh Amgar 164 781 221 915
in Fig. 2.8 30 Bandhogarh Blackpadri 32 179 57 251

BANDHAVGARH-ACHANAKMAR 55
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
31 Bandhogarh Hathpura 179 976 248 1173
32 Bandhogarh Kusmaha Khurd 138 708 201 874
33 Shahdol Sohagpur Khouhal 42 192 60 230
34 Pushparajgarh Mekal Pahad NA NA NA NA
35 Sohagpur Silpari 92 437 119 483
36 Sohagpur Lamro 147 982 242 1175
37 Sohagpur Jugwari 300 1502 458 1886
38 Sohagpur Majhagawan 255 1327 374 1533
39 Sohagpur Arjhuli 81 435 139 506
40 Pushparajgarh Kharsol 139 733 175 853
41 Sohagpur Pachdi 154 716 205 841
42 Sohagpur Deori Tola 164 812 200 941
43 Sohagpur Kapildhara 80 354 102 374
44 Sohagpur Sonaha 104 540 150 674
45 Sohagpur Mekal Pahad NA NA NA NA
46 Pushparajgarh Mekal Pahad NA NA NA NA
47 Anuppur Chhira Patpar 26 121 36 160
48 Sohagpur Bandhawa Bada 340 1627 438 1878
49 Sohagpur Kelmaniya 373 1678 494 2021
50 Pushparajgarh Jaitahari 88 484 107 483
51 Sohagpur Patkhai 323 1551 416 1834
52 Anuppur Audhera 122 567 147 603
53 Pushparajgarh Ahirgawan 111 589 133 686
54 Sohagpur Koilaha 77 417 120 558
55 Sohagpur Bamura 185 843 249 992
56 Sohagpur Samatpur 275 1403 421 1671
57 Sohagpur Kathai 57 259 75 318
58 Sohagpur Turri 124 600 170 656
59 Sohagpur Amha Tola 144 665 213 876
60 Sohagpur Kathautiya 306 1406 411 1721

56 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
62 Sohagpur Chhirhati 34 172 47 209
63 Sohagpur Kodwar Kalan 137 657 199 797
64 Anuppur Dudhmaniya 128 685 176 779
65 Jaithari Gaurela 210 949 271 1145
66 Jaithari Daledeeh 34 160 37 181
67 Pushparajgarh Padri 124 626 176 714
68 Pushparajgarh Bilai Kher 25 128 36 162
69 Anuppur Didwapani 101 543 122 613
70 Jaithari Thehi 59 313 82 384
71 Pushparajgarh Girwi 109 525 137 584
72 Sohagpur Khoh 256 1264 306 1387
73 Anuppur Akua 168 731 69 322
74 Anuppur Badhar 120 555 157 678
75 Anuppur Kirar 55 272 73 303
76 Jaithari Kholaiya 67 328 120 445
77 Jaithari Padari 131 588 143 639
78 Jaithari Chhirpani 27 139 44 175
79 Jaithari Baihar 184 886 239 1086
80 Jaithari Behnadawar 95 494 146 665
81 Jaithari Dodhipani 172 905 241 1012
82 Pushparajgarh Mekal Pahad 31 152 34 156
83 Jaithari Khursa 94 429 126 463
84 Jaithari Padripani 135 728 170 850
85 Jaithari Bhelma 151 814 164 890
86 Jaithari Pondi 318 1502 440 1680
87 Pushparajgarh Tali 135 675 169 822
88 Pushparajgarh Bharni 102 502 130 608
89 Pushparajgarh Pamra 140 762 190 900
90 Pushparajgarh Bijauri 124 623 192 793
91 Pushparajgarh Umargohan 82 336 114 425

BANDHAVGARH-ACHANAKMAR 57
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.9:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Bandhavgarh-
Achanakmar

58 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.10:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the
Bandhavgarh-
Achanakmar Corridor
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

BANDHAVGARH-ACHANAKMAR 59
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

BANDHAVGARH-SANJAY-DUBRI-GURU GHASI DAS

Two habitat linkages exist that serve as Figure 2.11:

corridors for connecting source population of Potential habitat
Bandhavgarh to sink habitats of Sanjay-Dubri connectivity for tiger
and Guru Ghasi Das .The major threats in this movement between
landscape to habitat linkages are linear Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-
developments of structures associated with Dubri-Guru Ghasi Das
mining activities. The second important threat as depicted by
is biotic pressures and poaching of prey and CIRCUITSCAPE model
tigers. A vigil needs to be kept at all times
while granting approvals to projects in this
region so that appropriate mitigation measures
are ensured from the planning phase of
projects. Inputs in the form of restorative
ecology and eco development are needed to
keep/ make the corridors functional. The
importance of this linkage cannot be
undermined as towards the east large habitat
still exists but can only be populated by tigers
if connectivity with Bandhavgarh remains
intact. Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-Dubri-Guru Ghasi
Das holds promise for long term tiger
conservation but only if this connectivity
remains functional.

Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-Dubri-Guru Ghasidas
2
Habitat size 21607 Km
Source Population Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserve
Size of Source 47-71
Protected Areas Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserve
Sanjay-Dubri
Guru Ghasidas NP
Corridors Bandhavgarh -Sanjay-Dubri

60 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.12:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-
Dubri-Guru Ghasi Das
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.3)

BANDHAVGARH-SANJAY-DUBRI-GURU GHASI DAS 61

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Madhya Pradesh Sidhi Majholi Ghoghi 41 241 68 338
2 Majholi Parsili 193 1100 306 1329
3 Majholi Naudhiya 556 2838 858 3970
4 Kusmi Amjhar NA NA 174 748
4 Kusmi Amjhar NA NA NA NA
5 Majholi Chamradol 387 1785 522 2354
6 Kusmi Goindwar 29 173 71 264
7 Kusmi Dubari Kalan 162 717 215 831
8 Kusmi Lawahi 74 393 105 522
9 Kusmi Deomath 104 545 191 707
10 Kusmi Kota 252 1227 359 1513
11 Kusmi Khaira 35 188 60 261
12 Shahdol Jaisinghnagar Pathrahta 220 1159 378 1881
13 Beohari Sathni 254 1270 368 1654
14 Beohari Magardaha 274 1347 401 1688
15 Beohari Bhanni 449 2173 621 2819
16 Beohari Sejhari 31 164 67 273
17 Beohari Sarwahi Khurd 220 1195 334 1597
18 Beohari Bhamraha 461 2280 662 2712
19 Beohari Khari 150 650 185 903
20 Beohari Deori 208 1125 261 1405
21 Beohari Mair 93 445 117 569
22 Beohari Ambar NA NA 241 1004
22 Beohari Ambar NA NA NA NA
23 Jaisinghnagar Patehara Tola 63 377 118 514 Table 2.3:
Villages within the
24 Beohari Nakuni 213 1096 331 1482 Least Cost Pathway
25 Beohari Judmani 55 268 88 363 Corridor
connectingBandhavgar
26 Beohari Hathwar 86 488 161 660
h-Sanjay-Dubri-
27 Beohari Nado 151 764 221 1039 Gurughasi Das as
28 Beohari Karaundiya 141 685 190 851 show in Fig. 2.12

62 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
29 Beohari Jagmal 154 763 263 1110
30 Beohari Boddiha 162 924 280 1133
31 Beohari Gada 228 1141 328 1453
32 Beohari Papredi 375 1914 597 2379
34 Beohari Tikhawa 387 1996 497 2482
35 Beohari Sarwahi Kalan 153 792 228 1214
36 Beohari Charka 255 1378 440 1869
37 Beohari Bocharo 211 1122 379 1606
38 Beohari Hanumanpur 163 842 289 1041
39 Beohari Kharhara 54 309 85 425
40 Beohari Mahdeva 100 304 295 1299
41 Jaisinghnagar Khadgadi 173 754 204 806
42 Jaisinghnagar Umarkhohi 101 484 147 622
43 Jaisinghnagar Aunta 47 238 69 282
44 Beohari Devarda 146 725 219 920
45 Beohari Pondi Khurd 104 485 173 792
46 Beohari Chandrmadol NA NA NA NA
47 Beohari Bhainstal NA NA NA NA
48 Beohari Newari NA NA NA NA
49 Beohari Bhutha Tola NA NA NA NA
50 Beohari Karri NA NA NA NA
51 Beohari Parsel NA NA NA NA
52 Beohari Padui NA NA NA NA
53 Beohari Mudchaur NA NA NA NA
54 Beohari Davraunha 73 347 105 547
55 Beohari Chhatwa 63 286 104 455
56 Beohari Jamuniha 39 191 70 302
57 Jaisinghnagar Pipari 123 629 196 765
58 Jaisinghnagar Bansa 336 1562 493 1930
59 Jaisinghnagar Tetka 255 1267 359 1686

BANDHAVGARH-SANJAY-DUBRI-GURU GHASI DAS 63

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
60 Jaisinghnagar Basahi 169 846 249 1090
61 Beohari Khari Badi 119 599 208 853
62 Jaisinghnagar Ghori Ghat 116 496 94 428
62 Jaisinghnagar Ghori Ghat 38 156 121 543
63 Jaisinghnagar Dhaneda 150 713 186 933
65 Beohari Banasi 79 402 143 611
66 Beohari Khusariya 73 319 104 461
67 Jaisinghnagar Charkwah 98 486 169 794
68 Jaisinghnagar Hidwah 34 243 67 280
69 Jaisinghnagar Jamudi 232 1131 305 1416
70 Jaisinghnagar Malauti 102 540 159 706
71 Jaisinghnagar Thadi Pathar 53 296 73 338
72 Jaisinghnagar Tali Kalan 182 930 244 1080
73 Jaisinghnagar Pahadiya 223 1021 302 1166
74 Jaisinghnagar Narghi 69 336 95 423
75 Jaisinghnagar Ghiyar 87 463 127 582
76 Jaisinghnagar Mudariya Tola 194 874 257 1072
77 Jaisinghnagar Bataudi 87 479 134 588
78 Jaisinghnagar Karki 527 2510 701 2902
79 Jaisinghnagar Kolhua 18 83 33 138
80 Jaisinghnagar Bansukli 343 1570 446 1813
81 Jaisinghnagar Kothigarh 164 856 271 1039
82 Jaisinghnagar Gajwahi 143 666 187 808
83 Jaisinghnagar Mungaha 44 220 53 254
84 Jaisinghnagar Pathrapani 81 397 114 487
85 Jaisinghnagar Antoli 130 674 193 864
86 Jaisinghnagar Bartua 38 179 48 224
87 Jaisinghnagar Kanadi Kalan 325 1595 491 1910
88 Jaisinghnagar Nadna 132 639 206 817
89 Jaisinghnagar Bineka 200 942 240 1076

64 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
90 Jaisinghnagar Basnagri 174 849 199 1043
91 Sohagpur Beliya 162 641 194 762
92 Sohagpur Amohali NA NA NA NA
93 Sohagpur Gadh (garh) NA NA NA NA
94 Sohagpur Hardiha Kalan NA NA NA NA
95 Jaisinghnagar Jhalra NA NA NA NA
96 Beohari KHAND 2373 10921 2305 10653
97 Sohagpur Ankuri 252 1144 333 1330
98 Sohagpur Bela 215 950 285 1166
98 Chhattisgarh Koriya Bharatpur Bela 126 570 200 719
99 Madhya Pradesh Shahdol Sohagpur Dadratola 164 792 224 993
100 Sohagpur Duladar 147 666 184 744
101 Sohagpur Pondi 92 386 108 451
102 Sohagpur Bhadwahi 156 669 201 775
104 Sohagpur Dhaunha 156 667 192 768
105 Sohagpur Chandela 105 437 145 571
105 Chhattisgarh Koriya Bharatpur Chandela 34 145 57 166
106 Madhya Pradesh Shahdol Sohagpur Mehrauda 55 238 68 317
107 Sohagpur Bhitri 22 102 26 105
108 Sohagpur Kudra Tola 59 297 92 378
109 Sohagpur Patori 93 469 123 569
110 Sohagpur Semra 136 667 167 774
111 Sohagpur Kodar 51 223 67 239
112 Sohagpur Lamar 75 355 125 467
113 Sohagpur Harri Dol 78 359 95 444
114 Sohagpur Kudari 168 757 208 918
115 Sohagpur Bochaki 182 987 251 1153
116 Sohagpur Kholka 84 400 95 421
117 Sohagpur Sudwar 163 874 201 1005
118 Sohagpur Karua 318 1484 433 1742

BANDHAVGARH-SANJAY-DUBRI-GURU GHASI DAS 65

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
119 Sohagpur Hardiha Khurd 8 60 3 33
120 Sohagpur NA NA NA NA
121 Umaria Bandhogarh Kichkhidi 124 594 199 726
122 Bandhogarh Ramna No. 2 NA NA NA NA
123 Bandhogarh Chorha 46 240 69 318
124 Bandhogarh Paili 29 172 41 213
126 Bandhogarh Makra 55 265 82 335
127 Bandhogarh Baradadhar 90 458 116 533
128 Chhattisgarh Koriya Bharatpur Badwahi 238 1091 387 1448
129 Bharatpur Barchha 25 109 38 142
130 Bharatpur Mehdauli 116 578 195 771
131 Bharatpur Satkiyari 54 249 78 348
133 Bharatpur Udaki 164 737 244 904
134 Bharatpur Chuil 81 404 105 476
135 Bharatpur Patasi 48 245 74 292
136 Bharatpur Semriha 173 830 242 1104
137 Bharatpur Kudra 76 451 126 522
138 Bharatpur Masaura 89 369 129 465
139 Bharatpur Ara 100 445 152 540
140 Bharatpur Tilauli 143 534 202 579
141 Bharatpur Godhaura 144 611 200 734
142 Bharatpur Hathwari 80 367 106 519
143 Bharatpur Katharradol 22 104 28 130
144 Bharatpur Aktawar 198 1017 263 1196
145 Bharatpur Badhwar 14 62 22 86
146 Bharatpur Janakpur 824 3773 1167 4849
147 Bharatpur Bhagwanpur 373 1820 532 2101
148 Bharatpur Jardol 37 148 56 165
149 Bharatpur Ganjar 69 281 83 324
150 Bharatpur Jamthan 251 1080 391 1365

66 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
151 Bharatpur Tartora 73 296 101 386
152 Bharatpur Kanjia 363 1571 454 1802
153 Bharatpur Jolgi 106 506 186 632
154 Bharatpur Usta NA NA NA NA
155 Bharatpur Malakdol 192 860 257 951
156 Bharatpur Kuwarpur 194 715 293 930
157 Bharatpur Bhumka 56 251 101 370
158 Bharatpur Mannodh 118 509 173 643
159 Bharatpur Patpartola 77 318 112 395
161 Bharatpur Matiya NA NA NA NA
162 Bharatpur Pipariyadol NA NA NA NA

BANDHAVGARH-SANJAY-DUBRI-GURU GHASI DAS 67

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.13:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-
Dubri-Guru Ghasi Das

68 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.14:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the
Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-
Dubri-Guru Ghasi Das
Corridor landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

BANDHAVGARH-SANJAY-DUBRI-GURU GHASI DAS 69

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

GURU GHASI DAS-PALAMAU-LAWALONG

Sanjay TR and Guru Ghasi Das NP are a contiguous Figure 2.15

forest patch, this patch continuous further as Potential habitat
Tamorpingla WLS. From Tamorpingla WLS two forested connectivity for tiger
arms project eastwards and serve as corridors to movement between
connect with Palamau TR. This entire area is rich in Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-
minerals specially coal. Utmost care needs to be taken Dubri-Guru Ghasi Das
to ensure that the corridor value of these habitats is not as depicted by
compromised while granting permissions for mineral CIRCUITSCAPE model
extraction. This habitat holds great potential for
recovering tiger populations as currently they have low
density of tigers but with management inputs and
connection with Bandhavgarh source they can be
revived. Sanjay has started showing recovery of tiger
populations after being declared tiger reserve.

Guru Ghasidas-Palamau-Lawalong
2
Habitat size 18759 Km
Source Population Palamau
Size of Source 6-13
Protected Areas Guru Ghasidas NP
Tamorpingla WLS
Semarsot WLS
Palamau
Mahauaduar WLS
Lawalong WLS
Corridors Guru Ghasidas - Tamorpingla
Tamorpingla-Palamau-Semarsot WLS
Palamau-Lawalong WLS

70 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.16:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Guru Ghasi Das-
Palamau-Lawalong
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.4)

GURU GHASI DAS-PALAMAU-LAWALONG 71

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Chhattisgarh Surguja Pal Bhanora 321 1752 578 2412
2 Pal Kapaut 83 437 119 483
3 Samari Kurdih 299 1486 395 1847
4 Wadrafnagar Dhadhia 249 1308 327 1543
5 Wadrafnagar Budhatand 229 1173 348 1426
6 Pal DumarKhola 318 1618 428 1938
7 Pratappur Jajawal 313 1533 365 1740
8 Pal Adhaura 80 335 173 655
9 Pal Lurghuta 109 488 150 632
10 Pal Dhaneshpur 72 393 112 506
11 Pal Bardar 192 925 289 1245
12 Pal Vishramnagar 131 626 179 779
13 Pal Chitvishrampur 73 405 129 453
14 Wadrafnagar Kotrahi 390 2330 572 2905
15 Wadrafnagar Rajkheta 403 2143 584 2804
16 Wadrafnagar Manpur 188 817 218 938
17 Wadrafnagar Dhodhi 132 639 220 821
18 Wadrafnagar Alka 228 1155 308 1436
19 Pratappur Dhondha 188 912 226 1013
20 Wadrafnagar Kachhia 103 507 138 599
21 Wadrafnagar Pansara 131 654 169 665
22 Wadrafnagar Kailashpur 122 592 159 694
23 Pratappur Narola 371 1990 452 2251
24 Pratappur Batai 80 421 133 557
25 Pal Manikpur 286 1366 409 1598
26 Wadrafnagar Bhaisamunda 9 49 18 72 Table 2.4:
27 Wadrafnagar Odari 301 1502 420 1794 Villages within the Least
Cost Pathway Corridor
28 Pratappur Bonga 322 1639 417 1964
connecting Guru Ghasi
29 Pal Sendur 318 1584 528 1978 Das-Palamau-Lawalong
30 Pratappur Govindpur 329 1750 396 1989 as shown in Fig.2.16

72 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

31 Pal Sarangpur 118 727 188 876

32 Wadrafnagar Badkagaon 277 1363 377 1648
33 Wadrafnagar Shardapur 376 1943 516 2415
34 Pal Piprahi 56 267 80 352
35 Pal Jabrahi 21 102 30 131
36 Pal Obari 125 718 162 776
37 Pal Khurra 10 47 21 95
38 Pal Alagdiha 72 348 93 359
39 Pal Semali 84 420 106 446
40 Pal Jatro 110 687 224 827
41 Pal Banaur 97 429 160 578
42 Pal NawadihKhurd 62 267 51 235
43 Samari Pundag 160 821 239 1067
44 Pal Sonhara 125 617 169 827
45 Pal Kapildevpur 326 1659 392 1935
46 Pal Pindra 91 468 134 534
47 Wadrafnagar Sursa (bhandarpura) 118 552 146 679
48 Pal Surra 127 649 181 811
49 Wadrafnagar ChalgaliKhas 288 1485 380 1869
50 Pratappur PahadKarwa 131 576 169 666
51 Samari Chunchuna 132 646 170 802
52 Wadrafnagar Bhaui Alias Jhor 107 459 139 571
53 Wadrafnagar Duwari 112 659 168 808
54 Pratappur Gorgi (neelkanthpur) 250 1241 288 1314
55 Pal Dhanwar Kalan 131 631 207 1284
56 Wadrafnagar Rampur 202 924 257 1085
57 Pal Tarkakhand 151 774 208 964
58 Pal Gamhariya 57 259 68 265
59 Samari Bairdih Kalan 91 457 152 648
60 Pal Champapur 133 634 210 812

GURU GHASI DAS-PALAMAU-LAWALONG 73

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

61 Pratappur Nawadhakki 73 347 106 377

62 Pal Lurgi Kalan 160 785 207 880
63 Pal Banda 85 386 103 407
64 Pal Padhi 145 697 189 886
65 Samari NawadihKhurd 72 386 112 493
66 Pratappur Majhgawan 114 643 145 756
67 Pal Chandaura 234 1007 309 1272
68 Pal Pathari 64 305 83 336
69 Pratappur Lolki 214 1113 321 1385
71 Pratappur Giriya 42 210 65 275
72 Pratappur GhatPendari 41 236 63 263
73 Pratappur Pakni 299 1566 361 1767
74 Surajpur Chikni 247 1144 293 1379
75 Pal Jhapra 112 566 192 710
76 Pal Ghaghara 163 882 246 1115
77 Pal Jhalariya 189 955 244 976
78 Pratappur Khunshi 135 648 176 779
79 Pal Budhudih 87 474 126 529
80 Pratappur Pahiya 209 944 242 1119
81 Pratappur Anjani 82 380 98 431
82 Pratappur Deori 175 823 190 946
83 Pal Kanda 123 565 159 686
84 Samari Chatniya 176 823 220 1021
85 Samari Jariyo 85 426 108 520
86 Pal Kotpali 160 806 209 950
87 Pal Sitarampur 165 732 181 884
88 Samari Bata 193 1126 248 1339
89 Samari Karamdih 66 359 85 367
90 Samari Lahasoon Path 177 968 221 1079
91 Samari Megaji 139 625 169 796

74 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

92 Samari Kothali 377 1735 437 1996

93 Samari Dattram 157 915 198 981
94 Samari Dumarkholi 260 1348 325 1617
95 Samari Samudri 33 193 61 249
96 Samari Idaripath 123 611 142 617
97 Samari Asanpani 115 598 164 625
98 Samari Charahat Kalan 132 715 181 795
99 Samari BairdihKhurd 15 64 140 431
100 Samari Laxmanpur 117 589 138 633
101 Samari Chainpur 272 1361 206 801
102 Jharkhand Palamu Latehar Largari 126 722 140 851
103 Latehar Hethpochra 270 1561 355 2052
104 Latehar Sohdag 93 514 145 888
105 Latehar Hesiklbar 27 227 47 287
106 Latehar Marabar 49 256 62 383
107 Latehar Dihi 387 2391 498 2985
108 Latehar Tubed 162 843 210 1225
109 Latehar Kaima 137 642 149 1012
110 Latehar Sasang 258 1628 345 1983
111 Latehar Ambajharan 54 268 77 391
112 Latehar Jaram 47 264 65 337
113 Latehar Manjar 89 634 140 861
114 Latehar Sukri 196 1030 239 1257
115 Latehar Baridih 72 360 86 409
116 Latehar Nawari 193 1337 285 1373
117 Latehar DhobiaTharan 29 181 37 218
118 Latehar Hutar 129 684 158 844
119 Latehar Sotam 107 645 153 869
120 Latehar Korhas 121 846 203 1235
121 Latehar Patuki 40 231 53 343

GURU GHASI DAS-PALAMAU-LAWALONG 75

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

122 Latehar Oden 60 372 84 411

123 Latehar Lohisini alias Tulbul 70 422 91 527
124 Latehar Matnag 27 187 44 250
125 Latehar Labarpur 63 322 91 467
126 Latehar Bendi 167 841 237 1312
127 Latehar DurangiKhurd 83 474 129 720
128 Latehar Parsahi 238 1482 354 2003
129 Latehar Bachra 29 144 33 171
130 Latehar Kend 61 326 86 459
131 Latehar Hotwag 200 1173 269 1513
132 Latehar Dumariatanr 30 161 44 243
133 Latehar Ledhpa 131 637 166 912
134 Latehar Durangi Kalan 108 565 150 789
135 Latehar Jer 76 407 84 502
136 Latehar Godna 106 563 153 791
137 Latehar Kodag 59 341 81 434
138 Latehar TupuKhurd 118 571 164 827
139 Latehar Hesla 80 470 105 589
140 Latehar Semariatanr 69 357 79 430
141 Latehar Kothila 17 129 27 140
142 Latehar Richughutu 107 406 110 557
143 Latehar Peshrar 161 908 178 1081
144 Latehar Uparpochra NA NA NA NA
145 Latehar Patariachotag 70 370 120 669
146 Latehar Lundi 94 460 121 620
147 Latehar Tupu Kalan 47 245 66 324
148 Latehar Tarwadih 320 1747 473 2358
149 Latehar Orwai 81 446 113 535
150 Latehar Gurgu alias Irgu 103 585 130 734
151 Latehar Hartua 62 278 77 386

76 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

152 Latehar Nawagarh 555 3312 779 4059

153 Latehar Bingara 155 746 190 913
154 Latehar Beraini 21 91 30 137
155 Latehar Demu 296 1653 520 2808
156 Latehar MankeriJagir 30 146 40 177
157 Latehar MankeriKhas 46 260 53 324
158 Latehar Dubiahi 17 83 19 99
159 Latehar Khairajagir 65 335 63 293
160 Latehar Kone 80 438 104 446
161 Latehar Khaira 14 85 21 88
162 Latehar Narayanpur 48 223 87 461
163 Latehar Baheratanr 24 110 27 123
164 Latehar Hosir 83 483 117 604
165 Latehar Murgidih 49 271 72 394
166 Latehar Nareshgarh 157 754 176 909
167 Latehar Nawadih 1 6 1 4
168 Latehar Ghanghri 27 123 32 128
169 Latehar Orea 65 325 73 399
170 Latehar Salaia 38 181 50 225
171 Latehar Patratu 74 422 107 636
172 Latehar Gulariatanr 23 81 38 208
173 Latehar Ichabar 39 196 65 315
174 Latehar Labarpur 56 243 93 468
175 Latehar Batat Kalan 87 282 95 475
176 Latehar Durub NA NA NA NA
177 Latehar TeniaKhar NA NA NA NA
178 Latehar Parwatanr NA NA NA NA
179 Latehar Rehrahi NA NA NA NA
180 Latehar Pachamba NA NA NA NA
181 Latehar Parahiatola NA NA NA NA

GURU GHASI DAS-PALAMAU-LAWALONG 77

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.17:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Bandhavgarh-Sanjay-
Dubri-Guru Ghasi Das

78 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.18:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Guru Ghasi
Das-Palamau-Lawalong
Corridor landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

GURU GHASI DAS-PALAMAU-LAWALONG 79

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

KANHA-ACHANAKMAR

This corridor is vital for sustenance of the Figure 2.19:

Achanakmar tiger population and for meta- Potential habitat
population management of pench -Kanha - connectivity for tiger
Achanakmar tiger populations. The corridor is movement between
part of an intact forest patch between Kanha- Kanha-Achanakmaras
Phen-Achanakmar. However the state depicted by
governments use the intervening forest for CIRCUITSCAPE model
commercial forestry activities . It is important to
ensure that these activities do not undermine the
functionality of this habitat as a wildlife corridor.
Other threats in this corridor are biotic pressures
from forest dwelling and neighboring
communities which can be alleviated by
restorative ecology and eco-development inputs.

Kanha-Achanakmar
2
Habitat size 16623 Km
Source Population Kanha Tiger Reserve
Size of Source 45-75
Protected Areas Kanha Tiger Reserve
Phen WLS
Achanakmar Tiger Reserve
Bhoramdeo NP
Corridors Kanha-Achanakmar
Kanha-Bhoramdeo
Kanha-Phen

80 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.20:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Kanha-Achanakmar
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.5)

KANHA-ACHANAKMAR 81
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

1 Madhya Pradesh Dindori Dindori F 58 Kindra 59 246 58 264

Kindra (kendra)
behraF.v
2 Dindori Dindori F 23 SilpidiF.v. 140 670 184 815
3 Dindori Dindori F 17 Kandawani F V 45 249 57 287
4 Dindori Dindori KarondiRyt 44 201 66 302
5 Dindori Dindori Ufri Mal 75 378 86 379
6 Dindori Dindori KhamharKhudraRyt 115 624 142 675
7 Dindori Dindori F 25 TarachF.v. 132 707 225 909
8 Dindori Dindori Chakmi Mal 48 290 70 325
9 Dindori Dindori ChakmiRyt 72 384 96 438
10 Dindori Dindori F 22 ChandaF.v. 173 889 226 951
11 Dindori Dindori SahajanaRyt 95 485 139 579
12 Dindori Dindori F 52 Uddhor(udhor)f.v. 108 546 138 632
13 Dindori Dindori F 54 DaldalKapatiF.v. 58 279 79 383
14 Dindori Dindori F 24 TantarF.v 189 838 228 954
15 Dindori Dindori F 38 GhurkutaF.v. 134 677 201 764
16 Mandla Bichhiya Masna 93 410 135 475
17 Mandla Bichhiya MurtaRyt 117 590 155 636
18 Chhattisgarh Bilaspur Lormi F.34 Chhaparwa 81 357 NA NA
Table 2.5:
19 Bilaspur Lormi F.9 Aurapani 76 339 NA NA
Villages within the Least
20 Bilaspur Lormi F.10 Boiraha 66 361 NA NA
Cost Pathway Corridor
21 Madhya Pradesh Balaghat Baihar F.v.(37) Benda 29 157 42 193 connecting
22 Mandla Bichhiya KewlariRyt 69 328 93 421 Bandhavgarh-
Achanakmar as shown
23 Mandla Bichhiya AnjaniRyt 74 373 103 472 in Fig. 2.20
24 Mandla Bichhiya HarratolaRyt 172 823 216 1014

82 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

25 Mandla Bichhiya F 33 SurajpuraF.v. 118 599 164 731

26 Mandla Bichhiya Anjani Mal 268 1185 281 1324
27 Mandla Bichhiya Chandwara Mal 37 180 47 204
28 Mandla Bichhiya F 26 AmgahanF.v. 28 132 54 231
29 Mandla Bichhiya Amagahan 47 218 45 167
30 Mandla Bichhiya Dhenko 49 264 76 332
31 Mandla Bichhiya Simariya 24 119 34 178
32 Mandla Bichhiya Pondi Alias BaharMunda 349 1546 477 1823
33 Mandla Bichhiya Rohta Alias Muhania 13 86 23 105
34 Mandla Bichhiya Majhgaon Mal 166 777 252 1081
35 Mandla Bichhiya F 36 BaigaKhedaF.v. 72 363 93 426
36 Mandla Bichhiya Jamgaon 179 751 230 857
37 Mandla Bichhiya Luri 127 588 175 682
38 Mandla Bichhiya F 28 RahangiF.v. 75 337 118 464
39 Mandla Bichhiya Jaitpuri 56 272 86 350
40 Mandla Bichhiya F 29 SaidaF.v. 130 540 164 653
41 Mandla Bichhiya BasniRyt. 193 952 274 1150
42 Mandla Bichhiya Patpara Jar 15 78 18 86
43 Mandla Bichhiya BilaiKhar 83 325 119 436
44 Mandla Bichhiya Medha 162 646 201 744
45 Mandla Bichhiya F 32 SathiyaF.v. 70 364 115 434
46 Mandla Bichhiya Badwar 101 441 147 564
47 Mandla Bichhiya F 30 AuraiKheda 59 273 96 366
F.v(oreay)

KANHA-ACHANAKMAR 83
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

48 Mandla Bichhiya F 35 Sajalagan 80 408 102 512

(sajalaghan)f.v
49 Mandla Bichhiya F 38 Pnarikheda Alias 109 551 100 473
Nawnadar
50 Mandla Bichhiya SaliwadaRyt 58 279 96 384
51 Mandla Bichhiya F 42 DeogaonF.v. 69 359 81 457
52 Mandla Bichhiya Khamhariya Mal 79 394 107 451
53 Dindori Dindori F 54 DaldalKapatiF.v. 58 279 79 383
55 Dindori Dindori F 54 DaldalKapatiF.v. 58 279 79 383
58 Mandla Bichhiya SaliwadaRyt 58 279 96 384
59 Mandla Bichhiya Khamhariya Mal 79 394 107 451
60 Dindori Dindori F 54 DaldalKapatiF.v. 58 279 79 383
62 Dindori Dindori F 54 DaldalKapatiF.v. 58 279 79 383

84 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.21:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Kanha-
Achanakmar

KANHA-ACHANAKMAR 85
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.22:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kanha-
Achanakmar Corridor
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

86 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

KANHA-PENCH

Figure 2.23: This corridor is an example of a two source populations of

Potential habitat tigers can be managed as meta-population. There is
connectivity for tiger evidence from telemetry and camera trapping to show that
movement between tigers regularly use this corridor to move between Kanha
Kanha-Pench as and Pench. The corridor at places is sufficiently wide so as
depicted by to support prey species and patches of habitat that serve as
CIRCUITSCAPE model temporary refuges for dispersing tigers. However the
corridor has come in focus due to the proposed widening of
the National Highway -7 to six lanes. Three state highways
and railway lines intersect this corridor. The widening of
these along with infrastructure development that
accompanies such projects is major threat to this vital
corridor habitat. If permissions are granted for such
activities then appropriate mitigation measures need to be
put in place to safeguard the functionality of this corridor
for tigers and other wildlife such as Gaur and Wild dog.

Kanha-Pench
Habitat size 16623 Km2
Source Population Kanha Tiger Reserve and
Pench Tiger Reserve
Size of Source (45-75 ) Kanha
(53-78) Pench
Protected Areas Kanha Tiger Reserve and
Pench Tiger Reserve
Corridors Kanha- Pench I
Kanha-Pench II

KANHA-PENCH 87
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.24:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Kanha-Pench overlaid
with village map (the
village numbers are
referenced in Table 2.6)

88 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

1 Madhya Pradesh Balaghat Balaghat F.v.(1) Kota 18 85 28 121

2 Balaghat Padriganj 232 955 273 1133
3 Baihar Bariya 118 551 167 737
4 Baihar Pondi 264 1152 361 1494
5 Baihar Dorli 66 280 77 376
6 Baihar Salhe 32 126 34 159
7 Waraseoni Selwa 161 915 260 966
8 Waraseoni Khairgondi 48 233 53 245
9 Baihar Akashmiri 87 419 121 494
10 Baihar Sandha 93 433 114 597
11 Waraseoni Bhandamurri 368 1783 532 1992
12 Baihar Chini 264 1329 318 1552
13 Baihar Fatehpur Ryt. 22 111 36 144
14 Waraseoni Chawarpani 2 9 7 27
15 Baihar Charegaon 120 586 158 730
16 Baihar Tirgaon 127 571 169 668
17 Baihar Majgaon Mal. 122 624 168 702
18 Baihar Korja 234 1199 277 1322
19 Baihar Dhipur Ryt. 48 225 63 285
20 Baihar Gararibahera 8 37 9 52
21 Baihar Khursitola 29 130 36 113
22 Baihar Jhiriya 137 603 190 768
23 Baihar Bhada Mal. 141 690 188 869
24 Baihar Bhidi 246 1283 360 1489
25 Baihar Bagholi 296 1272 366 1450
Table 2.6:
26 Baihar Fatehpurtheka 60 274 87 299
Villages Within the
Least Cost Pathway 27 Baihar Kukada 38 161 40 181
Corridor connecting 28 Baihar Baroorgota 12 62 11 54
Bandhavgarh-
Achanakmar as shown 29 Waraseoni Tengni Khurd 225 1045 307 1274
in Fig. 2.24 30 Waraseoni Salebharri 139 620 170 785

KANHA-PENCH 89
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

31 Waraseoni Bagdehi 89 447 105 469

32 Balaghat Chacheri 81 397 130 518
33 Waraseoni Dohara 68 364 111 458
34 Waraseoni Bandri 296 1500 396 1780
35 Waraseoni Khairgaon 145 809 218 972
36 Balaghat Laweri 78 372 92 399
37 Balaghat Manpur 65 313 88 338
38 Balaghat Katurli 10 58 21 86
39 Waraseoni Katangjhari 628 2952 804 3665
40 Baihar Tikariya 24 120 39 177
41 Waraseoni Kanjai 480 2165 606 2482
42 Waraseoni Chhindlai 189 953 248 1079
43 Balaghat Kategaon 147 716 198 848
44 Balaghat Titwa 137 672 228 840
45 Waraseoni Pipariya 223 1146 285 1330
46 Waraseoni Dharawasi 200 956 323 1322
47 Waraseoni Malgondi 2 6 2 4
48 Waraseoni Gankheda 10 68 16 67
49 Waraseoni Ranikuthar 194 988 261 1055
50 Balaghat Dongarbodi 53 251 67 270
51 Balaghat Hirmutola 52 246 71 264
52 Waraseoni Tekadi 161 818 234 905
53 Waraseoni Pandhrapani 124 596 171 680
54 Waraseoni Bagholi 429 2021 541 2149
55 Waraseoni Mahurjhari 0 0 0 0
56 Waraseoni Chichgaon 227 1135 277 1178
57 Waraseoni Salhe 197 869 243 1020
58 Waraseoni Bori 451 2139 613 2326
59 Waraseoni Bahiyatikur 214 1022 247 1077
60 Waraseoni Marhera 127 683 176 686

90 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

61 Waraseoni Garapuri 116 569 137 598

62 Waraseoni Khursodi 102 499 121 535
63 Waraseoni Naitra 333 1642 424 1755
64 Waraseoni Nagjhar 130 649 158 701
65 Waraseoni Sirra 328 1471 397 1572
66 Waraseoni Pipariya 309 1455 285 1330
67 Waraseoni Botejhari 411 2138 529 2286
68 Waraseoni Nandgaon 322 1488 444 1733
69 Waraseoni Tekadi 417 2050 507 2403
70 Waraseoni Budbuda 906 4391 1134 4867
71 Katangi Sirpur 511 2265 601 2510
72 Balaghat F.v.(4) Pandhra Tola 0 0 0 0
73 Waraseoni Kuwagarh 0 0 0 0
74 Baihar 0 0 0 0
75 Baihar Narna 151 676 171 751
76 Baihar Pongarjhodi 166 803 225 991
77 Baihar Dalwada 60 233 80 290
78 Waraseoni 0 0 0 0
79 Waraseoni 0 0 0 0
80 Baihar 0 0 0 0
81 Katangi Tekadi 182 835 223 987
82 Seoni Keolari Payli Jar 0 0 0 0
83 Keolari Khair Ranji 274 1457 438 1700
84 Keolari Potalpani 60 276 61 289
85 Keolari Turga 55 303 82 367
86 Keolari Tendu Tola Ryt 52 226 79 278
87 Keolari Chirai Dongari Ryt 18 111 32 125
88 F3 Gaurjholopani 0 0 0 0
89 Keolari Muchche Dobri Ryt 0 0 0 0
90 Keolari Pipardaun 71 309 84 367

KANHA-PENCH 91
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

91 Keolari Taktua 68 298 76 392

92 Barghat Pandharapani 29 150 47 185
93 Barghat Keshlai 37 155 59 235
94 Kurai F5 Bawanthaeli 17 77 22 98
95 Kurai Kurai 375 1696 464 1927
96 Kurai Chandarpur 69 330 88 371
97 Kurai Beesapurryt 97 336 106 436
98 Kurai Pindkapar 468 2044 501 2090
99 Kurai Bormara 74 371 105 466
100 Kurai Pindrai 128 559 145 671
101 Kurai Raiyarao 78 359 91 341
102 Kurai Kodajhiriryt 153 755 196 849
103 Kurai Harduli 68 314 69 305
104 Kurai Bichuwaryt 25 136 15 73
105 Kurai Dungariya 0 0 0 0
106 Barghat F.v.(4)bijajhola 0 0 0 0
107 Mandla Bichhiya Pondi 95 427 113 507
108 Nainpur Chichgaon 275 1241 320 1395
109 Nainpur Gonjhi 225 1078 257 1224
110 Nainpur Bijegaon 106 445 139 525
111 Nainpur Kohka 83 378 110 455
112 Nainpur Keregaon 133 650 168 779
113 Nainpur Patadeh 81 387 95 438
114 Nainpur Silwani 62 306 82 339
115 Nainpur F 3 Turur Fv 46 227 63 253
116 Nainpur F 4 Patwahi Fv 18 91 28 116
117 Bichhiya Bagaspur 44 226 50 266
118 Nainpur Bharweli [bharbheli] 103 466 146 579
119 Bichhiya Surpati 86 380 112 468
120 Bichhiya Dungariya 93 403 123 482
121 Bichhiya Jhangul 98 394 118 435

92 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.25:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Kanha-
Pench

KANHA-PENCH 93
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.26:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kanha-Pench
Corridor landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

94 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

PENCH-SATPURA-MELGHAT

Figure 2.27: 1. Pench-Satpura

Potential habitat The habitat connectivity between Pench and Satpura is through
connectivity for tiger fragmented forests interspersed with agriculture, human habitation ,
movement between industrial development and mines. Yet genetic studies show that gene
Pench-Satpura-Melghat
flow of tigers between Satpura and Pench still occurs. To safeguard this
as depicted by
corridor for long term survival of both Pench and Satpura tiger
CIRCUITSCAPE model
populations restorative inputs and retrofitting of infrastructural
development within this corridor is required. Part of this corridor near
Satpura passes through the coal belt and is under intense pressure for
mining . Infrastructure in the form of roads and railway lines that
connect coal bearing region with industries need to have mitigative
structures like over and under passes in the corridor habitat so as not to
form linear barriers. Development of any sort should be discouraged
within the corridor habitat.
2. Satpura-Melghat
This corridor is mostly through forested landscape of Hoshangabad,
Betul and East Nimar and currently has low intensity agriculture and
human density .It would be timely to safeguard this corridor and
further development projects within this region should only be
permitted with appropriate safeguards so as to maintain the
functionality of the habitat as a viable corridor permitting gene flow of Pench-Satpura-Melghat
wild species between Satpura and Melghat. 2
Habitat size 30687 Km
3. Pench-Satpura Source Population Pench, Satpura and
Part of this corridor is common with that of Pench-Satpura, which Melghat Tiger Reserve
consists of degraded forest dispersed with various forms of human land Size of Source (53-78) Pench
uses like agriculture and mining. The habitat patch near Nawagaon is
(42-46) Satpura
the weakest link in the corridor and would benefit from restorative
inputs. Western part of the corridor is again through patchy ridge top (30-39) Melghat
forests but current landuse is not likely to be a barrier to tiger Protected Areas Pench
movement. Future development in this area should build in appropriate Satpura
safeguards. Melghat
Corridors Pench-Satpura
Satpura-Melghat

PENCH-SATPURA-MELGHAT 95
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.28:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Pench-Satpura-Melghat
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.7)

96 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.29:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Pench-Satpura-Melghat
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.7)

PENCH-SATPURA-MELGHAT 97
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

1 Madhya Pradesh Betul Betul F.23 Bijadehi 31 163 46 191

2 Bhainsdehi Hurra Malgujari (harra mal) 9 72 17 121
3 Betul Khamalpur 95 534 124 667
4 Bhainsdehi Harra (f.v) 76 542 120 666
5 Shahpur Banka Bharda 66 367 87 413
6 Betul Palaspani 103 595 118 612
7 Shahpur Tara 304 1749 398 2083
8 Betul Khara Gondi (kherigondi) 69 424 96 520
9 Shahpur F.16 Baretha 133 711 178 860
10 Betul Bod Ryt 113 690 156 815
11 Betul F.22 Bakudviran 12 70 23 91
12 Amla Bhaldehif.v 22 102 38 170
13 Amla Thani 150 912 183 1032
14 Bhainsdehi Chikhalda (f.v) 59 385 101 506
15 Betul Ghodawadi 79 406 88 459
16 Betul Padalda 47 265 57 290
17 Betul Dolidhana 213 1332 325 1640
18 Shahpur Chikhliryt 180 1054 300 1605
19 Betul Kamtharyt 4 22 9 34
20 Shahpur Matigarh 10 50 14 81
21 Betul F.28 Arjungondi 9 64 21 110
22 Betul Pachama 79 547 125 600
23 Betul Bodi 172 922 250 1182
24 Betul Harrai 120 686 149 827
25 Betul Khedla 120 661 166 808
Table 2.7:
26 Betul Churni 220 1280 301 1585
Villages within the Least
27 Betul Kursanaf.v.(10) 85 487 138 648 cost Pathway Corridor
28 Shahpur F.5 Mendhakheda 60 307 79 431 connecting Pench-
Satpura-Melghat as
29 Shahpur Panda Jhiri 78 504 119 635
shown in Fig. 2.28,
30 Shahpur Tendukhedaryt 130 779 109 633 2.29

98 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

31 Shahpur Tangnaryt 30 183 52 255

32 Shahpur Khaprawadi 41 256 47 335
33 Shahpur Kantawadi 84 499 134 585
34 Betul Amapura (amapur) 34 210 68 290
35 Betul Bancha 53 298 74 413
36 Betul F.29 Banbodi 78 463 122 648
37 Shahpur Kajli 86 538 125 714
38 Betul Ajai 65 389 111 473
39 Shahpur Deshawadi 362 2018 444 2351
40 Shahpur F.8 Gudi Mai (gudhi) 32 150 49 213
41 Betul Bhurbhur 24 138 35 178
42 Betul Alamgarh 138 880 234 1002
43 Betul Pipal Barra 134 787 219 978
44 Shahpur Chirotiya 78 510 99 566
45 Shahpur Chikhli Mal 81 463 108 572
46 Shahpur Ghisibagla 341 2024 462 2479
47 Betul Kamtha Mal 141 839 244 1067
48 Betul Chirapatla 446 2528 665 3194
49 Betul Malseoni 172 1059 245 1303
50 Amla Kalmeshwara 335 1847 464 2246
51 Betul Chopna 80 441 122 580
52 Betul Gatakhedaryt 107 581 146 717
53 Amla Thuthamahf.v (thuthama) 30 169 38 207
54 Betul F.26 Dharakhoh 20 131 28 145
55 Betul Sajpurf.v.(2) 22 123 36 156
56 Amla Bisighat 22 123 37 189
57 Betul Khokra 133 762 193 954
58 Bhainsdehi Lapa (f.v) 46 284 72 418
59 Amla Kachhar 95 552 126 653
60 Betul Pajhar 28 168 39 208

PENCH-SATPURA-MELGHAT 99
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

61 Betul Belond 135 702 163 937

62 Betul Rojhada 84 431 108 555
63 Amla Bichchhu Khan F.v 60 342 72 425
64 Betul F.27 Sihari 47 243 49 234
65 Amla Khadepipriyaryt. 66 431 119 621
66 Bhainsdehi Chakdhanaraiyat 76 512 126 641
67 Amla Kharigayawani Mal 179 960 211 1146
68 Bhainsdehi Doda Jam 154 995 273 1299
69 Bhainsdehi Ghorpad Mal 91 687 171 911
70 Bhainsdehi Ghorpadraiyat 16 113 24 162
71 Amla Khateda 93 522 114 655
72 Amla Khatgarh 7 51 21 120
73 Bhainsdehi Tingariya (tigariya) 87 666 171 914
74 Bhainsdehi Dhakna 63 384 78 511
75 Betul Rathipur 164 824 214 992
76 Bhainsdehi Dhengna 90 641 144 922
77 Bhainsdehi Palanga (f.v) 27 250 59 311
78 Bhainsdehi Utari 117 915 231 1204
79 Bhainsdehi Bijori 60 359 89 475
80 Chhindwara Jamai Bhardagarh 228 1371 366 2006
81 Jamai Mendka 38 258 59 319
82 Jamai F.v.5 Padar 74 369 112 634
83 Jamai Badnoor 250 1203 269 1198
84 Betul Garadehif.v.(4) Na Na Na Na
85 Betul F.11 Sakmandiviran Na Na Na Na
86 F.4 Sakpandu Na Na Na Na
87 F.21 Dhanwarviran Na Na Na Na
88 Betul F.15 Bhandarpaniviran Na Na Na Na
89 F.10 Silapativiran Na Na Na Na
90 Betul Na Na Na Na

100 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

90 Na Na Na Na
90 Chhindwara Bichhua Na Na Na Na
90 Sausar Na Na Na Na
90 Sausar Na Na Na Na
90 Hoshangabad Na Na Na Na
90 Na Na Na Na
92 Chhindwara Jamai Gurrekhurai Mau 93 550 144 758
93 Chhindwara Kalathuni 140 713 143 708
94 Jamai Jamairyt. 35 184 48 231
95 Jamai Tandsi 16 94 29 141
96 Jamai Satijhiri 16 93 37 227
97 Jamai Batri 127 665 152 882
98 Jamai Dhobe 60 373 149 930
99 Jamai Khumkal 103 591 135 871
100 Jamai Talkhamra 30 169 60 295
101 Jamai Bhatodiya Kalan 171 1001 243 1217
102 Jamai Tekadhana 126 768 169 976
103 Jamai Karanji 34 198 45 223
104 Jamai Dhau 232 1341 300 1688
105 Jamai Chikatbarri 67 350 77 382
106 Jamai Bakhari 56 354 87 568
107 Jamai Chandniyakoylawadi 80 458 144 622
108 Jamai Lakhapur 14 82 28 109
109 Jamai Rakhikol 628 3105 482 2181
110 Jamai Dungariya 288 1404 305 1415
111 Jamai Churnichougan 86 487 128 602
112 Jamai Pindai Kalan 124 652 113 588
113 Chhindwara Bhudhena 125 587 152 795
114 Jamai Baliyamautandi 183 918 275 1189
115 Jamai Nawegaon Kalan 99 544 180 771

PENCH-SATPURA-MELGHAT 101
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

116 Jamai Bhordehikhurd 73 437 102 518

117 Jamai Nirama 58 295 82 402
118 Jamai Bakol 71 398 126 585
119 Chhindwara Govindwari Mal 153 879 220 1105
120 Chhindwara Pardhanghogri 180 997 222 1161
121 Chhindwara Deep 60 356 83 467
122 Chhindwara Deogarh 130 654 174 774
123 Bichhua Niwari 69 397 81 412
125 Jamai Dodasemar 153 923 181 894
126 Jamai Roradhekni 80 424 103 572
127 Jamai Pipariyaganu 104 625 158 737
128 Jamai Sindraimadho 94 619 133 776
129 Chhindwara Umardoh 170 1000 212 1266
130 Parasia Tandiryt. 65 348 73 434
131 Chhindwara Junapaniryt. 25 172 48 231
132 Bichhua Dudhgaon 214 1150 256 1279
133 Chhindwara Machhera 244 1401 342 1887
134 Chhindwara Kalkot 97 593 152 700
135 Jamai Sohagi 32 183 51 253
136 Jamai Surnadehiryt. 51 242 74 410
137 Parasia Sindaraiguraiyathar 200 1063 241 1501
138 Jamai Jambakiradi 193 1107 266 1331
139 Jamai Barelipar 60 353 80 422
140 Jamai Umarghodkhurd 97 556 116 613
141 Jamai Katkuhi 165 846 238 1201
142 Jamai Bhimsaniryt. 9 58 11 57
143 Jamai Panara 73 357 94 510
144 Jamai Karanjei 25 147 35 215
145 Parasia Pachdhar 69 323 99 368
146 Jamai Gujarghat 127 740 155 923

102 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

147 Parasia Sindarairyt. 133 796 163 899

148 Jamai Mohgaonkisan 148 820 195 913
149 Jamai Durgwada 66 368 89 461
150 Jamai Madni 70 379 82 385
151 Parasia Thawaribapu 63 379 81 476
152 Jamai Parwatghoghri 166 1050 259 1214
153 Chhindwara Kundai 69 415 109 604
155 Bichhua Mohpani Mal. 144 742 185 830
156 Bichhua Sanwari No.2 155 949 231 1114
157 Bichhua Devari 195 990 239 1080
158 Bichhua Jamuniyakhurd 106 520 119 592
159 Chhindwara Belkhera 151 834 180 997
160 Chhindwara Bhawariryt. 93 586 142 757
161 Chhindwara Mehlaribakol 162 943 217 1251
162 Chhindwara Lohangi 246 1193 313 1335
163 Chhindwara Shankarpur 84 501 110 558
164 Chhindwara Matiadoh 97 549 129 682
165 Chhindwara Govindwariryt. 40 222 49 244
166 Pandhurna Narayan Ghat F.v.1 54 263 65 336
167 Pandhurna Chhindboh 92 482 103 576
168 Chhindwara Ambajhiri 166 934 245 1095
169 Chhindwara Lans 113 660 153 725
170 Chhindwara Sillewani 172 954 263 1188
172 Sausar Khapa 275 1285 283 1262
173 Chhindwara Bhiropani 67 347 83 395
174 Bichhua Dundaseoni 59 313 93 414
175 Bichhua Mohpanibisa 40 221 50 239
177 Sausar Nauthal 106 516 127 608
178 Bichhua Khadabeli 177 950 211 984
180 Bichhua Bhimal Gondi 49 234 59 236

PENCH-SATPURA-MELGHAT 103
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

181 Bichhua Gadhewani 122 575 146 631

182 Bichhua Khamarpani 395 1875 529 2325
183 Bichhua Kanhargaon 132 655 145 683
184 Bichhua Paniyari 116 619 156 688
185 Bichhua Thuepani 159 879 190 911
186 Bichhua Sirapani 86 454 114 613
188 Bichhua Dholpur 104 571 136 700
193 East Nimar Harsud Palaspur (f.v) 28 195 44 275
194 East Nimar Harsud Ghutighat 84 450 125 640
195 Harda Timarni Badwani(f.v.1) 97 600 152 810
196 Timarni Donng(f.v.22) 19 114 28 186
197 Hoshangabad Itarsi Babaikhurd 111 618 149 800
198 Harda Timarni Jawarda(f.v.21) 51 310 68 415
199 Timarni Amba (f.v.4) 39 273 61 360
200 Timarni Gangradhana(f.v.3) 47 366 61 518
201 Timarni Lodhidhana(f.v.13) 116 807 174 1049
202 Timarni Banshipura(f.v.24) 44 352 73 500
203 Timarni Indpura(f.v.35) 71 553 125 834
204 Timarni Rawang 207 1379 302 1743
205 Timarni Keli 131 896 234 1292
206 Timarni Jhirna(f.v.17) 99 641 137 831
207 Timarni Lakhadeh(f.v.40) 64 482 98 585
208 Hoshangabad Itarsi Piparia Kalan 62 327 76 434
209 Seoni-malwa Sirupura 41 192 50 258
210 Seoni-malwa Morghat 67 359 99 482
211 Seoni-malwa Palasi(f.v.1) 41 253 75 373
212 Seoni-malwa Lahi 91 525 101 564
213 Seoni-malwa Samardha 82 488 113 595
214 Seoni-malwa Kamtha 82 507 125 675
215 Seoni-malwa Gidkheda(f.v.2) 27 180 56 269

104 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

216 Seoni-malwa Amakatara(f.v.3) 32 208 63 310

217 Itarsi Kiratpur 82 383 111 472
218 Itarsi Kandai Kalan 117 622 147 777
219 Itarsi Jamaidamami 30 153 51 218
220 Itarsi Karkhajamai 41 117 51 162
221 Seoni-malwa Narri 79 457 108 595
222 Seoni-malwa Keolajhir 66 386 86 430
223 Itarsi Jhirmau 104 516 136 596
224 Seoni-malwa Bandi 64 362 85 491
225 Itarsi Pandri 120 751 235 1184
226 Itarsi Dob 87 403 110 463
227 Itarsi Mohala 38 216 65 313
228 Itarsi Kaveli 1 1 2 7
229 Itarsi Jamani 343 1879 345 2036
230 Seoni-malwa Chandakhad 73 397 96 444
231 Itarsi Kasda Kalan 8 47 10 56
232 Seoni-malwa Jatamau(f.v.5) 33 179 50 235
233 Seoni-malwa Gotabarri 47 265 62 324
234 Itarsi Sonthia 84 459 101 485
235 Seoni-malwa Salai 43 266 59 318
236 Itarsi Temlakhurd 21 104 23 117
237 Itarsi Tangna 139 832 225 1248
238 Itarsi Dhaikhurd 159 917 222 1048
239 Itarsi Amjhira 70 389 90 517
240 Itarsi Nazarpur 87 397 96 464
241 Itarsi Khatama 73 415 95 496
242 Itarsi Jhalpa 9 48 11 62
243 Itarsi Parchha 100 559 90 494
244 Seoni-malwa Batki Alias Iklani 203 1044 269 1295
245 Seoni-malwa Borkunda 105 507 116 567

PENCH-SATPURA-MELGHAT 105
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

246 Seoni-malwa Jondhal 52 288 62 311

247 Seoni-malwa Sotachikhali 95 506 142 690
248 Seoni-malwa Pipalthon 162 967 234 1135
249 Seoni-malwa Pipaliya Kalan 441 1997 525 2304
250 Seoni-malwa Mahuadhana 119 637 185 979
251 Khohri Na Na Na Na
252 Kishanpur Na Na Na Na
253 Budimai(f.v.14) Na Na Na Na
254 Patlai Alias Sultanpur Na Na Na Na
255 Manamau Na Na Na Na
256 Jilwani Na Na Na Na
257 Kotra Na Na Na Na
258 Jujadeh Na Na Na Na
259 Amabad Na Na Na Na
260 Ratakans Na Na Na Na
261 Itarsi Ordnance Factory Itarsi 2255 10259 1883 7878
263 Khudamba (f.v.13) Na Na Na Na
266 Ranipura (tawanagar) Na Na Na Na
267 Chhindwara Jamai Kali Chhapar 2119 10692 Na Na
268 Hoshangabad Itarsi Chichadhan(f.v.12) 6 41 Na Na
269 Maharashtra Amravati Chikhaldara Ektai 112 782 176 1087
271 Chikhaldara Karanjikheda 106 641 134 685
272 Dharni Bulumgavhan 63 368 92 589
273 Dharni Katkumbha 68 354 120 666
274 Dharni Chatwabod 191 1148 261 1416
275 Dharni Kekada 120 621 198 944
276 Dharni Hatnada 55 264 64 321
278 Dharni Dhakarmal 125 940 184 1298
279 Dharni Chethar 72 405 97 579
280 Dharni Dharanmahu 237 1214 360 1766

106 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.30:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Pench-
Satpura-Melghat

PENCH-SATPURA-MELGHAT 107
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.31:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Pench-
Satpura-Melghat
Corridor landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

108 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-
TADOBA-INDRAVATI
Figure 2.32: The Balaghat forests and forests along the border of Chhattisgarh
Potential habitat connect the Kanha tiger population to the southern tiger populations of
connectivity for tiger Maharashtra (Nagzira-Navegaon and Tadoba) and with Indravati-
movement between Northern Andhra Pradesh (Kawal). The corridor is weakest at the three
Kanha-Navegaon- state junction of Madhya Pradesh-Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh
Nagzira Corridor as where the forest connectivity is only in the form of fragmented patches
depicted by interspersed with agriculture and small residential hamlets. The
CIRCUITSCAPE model corridor in Maharashtra is fragmented but the landscape matrix is not
entirely hostile to tiger movement and gene flow currently exists under
the prevalent landuse land cover. However, this landscape matrix is
under pressure from mining and irrigation/power projects and ground
validation to fine tune the corridor is essential for keeping this
connectivity functional. Development in this area needs to build in
appropriate mitigation measures so as not to compromise on the
conservation values of the region.
The corridor towards Indravati in the south continues in the forest that
persists on the border of Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh. A weak link
exists near the Dina-Dam and reservoir of Regadi village where
agriculture and irrigation project activities are likely to restrict wildlife
movement. Further development here would result in barriers to
movement. National highway 6 and state highway-6 intersect this
Kanha to Navegoan-Nagzira-Tadoba-Indravati
corridor and appropriate safeguards are required to be built in to ensure 2
Habitat size 62090 Km
that this linear infrastructure does not become a barrier to wildlife in
Source Population Kanha and Tadoba
the future.
Size of Source 45-75 (Kanha)
The connectivity between Tadoba and Indravati as well as between 66-74 (Tadoba- Chandrapur)
Tadoba and Northern Andhra Pradesh Tiger populations is made up of
Protected Areas Kanha Tiger Reserve
forests fragments which are relatively intact and at times interspersed
with agriculture. The corridor is weak at the agricultural patch on the Bhoramdev WLS
banks of river Wardha in the tehsil of Sirpur. Navegaon-Nagzira Tiger Reserve
Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve
The forest near Tadoba are on coal reserves and would always be under
Indravati Tiger Reserve
threat from mining. Care needs to be taken while granting approvals to
mining projects so as to safeguard the corridor value of this habitat. Corridors Kanha-Nagzira-Navegaon
Nagzira-Navegaon-Tadoba
Tadoba-Indravati
Kanha-Indravati

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 109

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.33:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between of
Navegaon-Nagzira-
Tadoba Corridor as
depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

110 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.34:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between of
Tadoba-Indravati
Corridor as depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 111

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.35:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Kanha-Navegaon-
Nagzira overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.8)

112 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.36:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Navegaon-Nagzira-
Tadoba overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.8)

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 113

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.37:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Tadoba-Indravati
overlaid with village
map ( the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.8)

114 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

1 Andhra Pradesh Adilabad Bejjur Gundepalle 48 215 Na Na

2 Bejjur Rebbena 388 1813 Na Na
3 Bejjur Outsarangipalle 709 3696 Na Na
4 Bejjur Bejjur 1047 4990 Na Na
5 Bejjur Kondapalle 351 1545 Na Na
6 Bejjur Yellur 421 1970 Na Na
7 Bejjur Lodpalle 244 954 Na Na
8 Bejjur Somini 185 986 Na Na
9 Bejjur Papanpet 322 1574 Na Na
10 Bejjur Tikkapalle 26 102 Na Na
11 Bejjur Koyachichal 36 148 Na Na
12 Bejjur Talai 97 418 Na Na
13 Bejjur Agarguda 156 704 Na Na
14 Bejjur Muraliguda 100 449 Na Na
15 Bejjur Bhatpalle Na Na Na Na
16 Bejjur Gannaram Na Na Na Na
17 Bejjur Telapalle Na Na Na Na
18 Kagaznagar Jankapur 101 404 Na Na
19 Kagaznagar Ankhoda 195 821 Na Na
20 Kagaznagar Kadamba 127 562 Na Na
21 Kagaznagar Mosam 513 2106 Na Na
22 Kagaznagar Nazrulnagar 1941 10924 Na Na
23 Kagaznagar Pothepalle Na Na Na Na
Table 2.8: 24 Sirpur (T) Bonki Na Na Na Na
Villages within the Least 25 Sirpur (T) Hudkili Na Na Na Na
cost Pathway Corridor
26 Sirpur (T) Jakkapur Na Na Na Na
between Kanha-
Navegaon-Nagzira- 27 Sirpur (T) Makidi Na Na Na Na
Tadoba-Indravati as 28 Sirpur (T) Navegaon Na Na Na Na
shown in Fig. 2.33,
2.34, 2.35, 2.36 and 29 Sirpur (T) Garlapet Na Na Na Na
2.37 30 Sirpur (T) Cheelapalle Na Na Na Na

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 115

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

31 Sirpur (T) Bhupalapatnam Na Na Na Na

32 Sirpur (T) Vempalle Na Na Na Na
33 Sirpur (T) Achalli Na Na Na Na
34 Sirpur (T) Chintakunta Na Na Na Na
35 Sirpur (T) Arepalle Na Na Na Na
36 Sirpur (T) Chunchupalle Na Na Na Na
37 Sirpur (T) Adepalle Na Na Na Na
38 Sirpur (T) Sirpur (p) Na Na Na Na
39 Maharashtra Gondiya Salekasa Darrekasa 75 339 80 397
40 Goregaon Telankhedi 179 848 173 747
41 Goregaon Garada 38 148 53 224
42 Salekasa Banjari 124 622 125 629
43 Salekasa Kular Bhatti 98 402 113 462
44 Sadak - Arjuni Jambhali 230 1100 261 1178
45 Arjuni Morgaon Palasgaon 152 658 158 742
46 Arjuni Morgaon Dhamditola 135 707 147 793
47 Salekasa Diwatesur Na Na Na Na
48 Goregaon Zaliya Na Na Na Na
49 Goregaon Jambhulpani 68 334 96 440
50 Goregaon Tilli 250 1148 297 1289
51 Salekasa Pipariya 530 2864 1025 3550
52 Salekasa Gallatola 121 534 118 554
53 Salekasa Dandhari 48 231 65 368
54 Salekasa Murkudoh 98 396 95 522
55 Goregaon Mundipar 643 2872 701 3052
56 Goregaon Palewada 279 1294 284 1249
57 Salekasa Daldalkuhi 52 221 56 279
58 Goregaon Kalpathari 245 1167 295 1269
59 Goregaon Sondlagondi 26 106 32 145
60 Salekasa Nawatola 129 592 144 702

116 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

61 Goregaon Ghumarra 281 1359 318 1400

62 Salekasa Kosamtarra 179 869 218 930
63 Salekasa Dhanegaon 43 231 54 251
64 Salekasa Toyagondi 122 644 132 631
65 Salekasa Jamakudo 430 2135 445 1902
66 Goregaon Murdoli 154 637 153 629
67 Goregaon Palkheda 141 640 193 846
68 Goregaon Mohagaon 316 1467 351 1581
69 Salekasa Managad 87 335 138 614
70 Goregaon Gowaritola 115 651 155 685
71 Salekasa Kopalgad 165 763 195 984
72 Goregaon Pipartola 146 652 186 817
73 Goregaon Nimba 294 1289 313 1427
74 Sadak - Arjuni Dodke 122 509 133 610
75 Goregaon Alebedar 50 164 59 238
76 Sadak - Arjuni Pandharwani 16 66 17 73
77 Sadak - Arjuni Kawalewada 114 440 139 605
78 Sadak - Arjuni Zankar Gondi 11 51 14 69
79 Arjuni Morgaon Malkazari 1 5 Na Na
80 Arjuni Morgaon Chutiya 43 202 76 248
81 Arjuni Morgaon Jambhali 149 653 171 703
82 Arjuni Morgaon Pauni 243 1380 272 1395
83 Salekasa Kamakazari Na Na Na Na
84 Salekasa Gendurzariya Na Na Na Na
85 Deori Singandoh 85 387 95 482
86 Arjuni Morgaon Dhabetekadi 17 74 19 72
87 Arjuni Morgaon Tidka 88 393 96 431
88 Arjuni Morgaon Jabbarkheda 57 252 58 254
89 Deori Alezari Na Na Na Na
90 Arjuni Morgaon Yerandi 83 357 94 440

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 117

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

91 Deori Ghogara 16 54 15 80
92 Arjuni Morgaon Wadegaon Bandya 182 777 222 862
93 Arjuni Morgaon Gawarra 134 643 161 711
94 Arjuni Morgaon Junevani (Rai) 33 124 30 125
95 Arjuni Morgaon Tirkhuri 22 79 26 95
96 Arjuni Morgaon Varvhi 82 332 97 384
97 Salekasa Maramjob Na Na 46 193
98 Goregaon Pangadi Na Na Na Na
99 Sadak - Arjuni Rengepar 207 912 231 1039
100 Sadak - Arjuni Pandhari 565 2550 598 2487
101 Arjuni Morgaon Jambhali (Gandhari) 35 109 32 105
102 Arjuni Morgaon Umarpayali 31 109 42 126
103 Arjuni Morgaon Tukum Narayan 160 654 173 695
104 Arjuni Morgaon Dongargaon 14 50 12 47
105 Deori Maramjob 225 989 241 991
106 Deori Kosbi (BK) 73 457 69 324
107 Arjuni Morgaon Ambhora 87 403 97 500
108 Arjuni Morgaon Arattondi 102 418 123 477
109 Arjuni Morgaon Dhamditola 136 663 151 782
110 Deori Khamtalav 20 98 21 109
111 Deori Zunzaritola 27 115 26 114
112 Sadak - Arjuni Kohalipar 28 120 29 114
113 Salekasa Tahkazari Na Na Na Na
114 Salekasa Sirmalkasa Na Na Na Na
115 Salekasa Kachargad Na Na Na Na
116 Goregaon Rengepar Na Na 0 0
117 Arjuni Morgaon Tumdimendha Na Na Na Na
118 Deori Malkazari Na Na Na Na
119 Deori Mundipar 45 216 46 248
120 Sadak - Arjuni Koylari 191 873 207 795

118 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

121 Deori Sukali 155 555 149 611

122 Sadak - Arjuni Putli 231 996 245 1094
123 Sadak - Arjuni Pradhantola N.V. 135 626 149 666
124 Sadak - Arjuni Sahakepar 39 185 54 242
125 Sadak - Arjuni Khurshipar 98 485 97 430
126 Deori Masulkasa 121 612 139 583
127 Sadak - Arjuni Khadki 171 868 213 1249
128 Sadak - Arjuni Rajguda 152 735 172 727
129 Deori Mhaisuli 139 894 145 970
130 Deori Kodikasa 135 645 162 776
131 Deori Dhawalkhedi 115 502 129 617
132 Deori Sundari 107 502 136 624
133 Deori Sarregaon 24 121 27 119
134 Deori Gadegaon 165 744 182 788
135 Deori Ghonadi 263 1238 333 1537
136 Deori Belgaon 83 418 82 372
137 Deori Bonde 123 589 152 605
138 Deori Dhanori 18 94 21 107
139 Deori Khambkhura 129 548 140 616
140 Deori Tumadikasa 93 480 109 476
141 Deori Kotijambhora 189 867 207 983
142 Deori Mehatakheda 180 893 177 813
143 Deori Kesori 148 742 166 812
144 Deori Paulzola 176 747 204 716
145 Deori Rehali 125 611 135 669
146 Deori Wadekasa 47 279 64 311
147 Deori Dongargaon 55 257 81 303
148 Deori Piparkhari 138 594 125 603
149 Deori Yedmagondi 190 905 236 1162
150 Sadak - Arjuni Nishani Na Na Na Na

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 119

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

151 Deori Pouni (Rithi) Na Na Na Na

152 Deori Gawarra (Rithi) Na Na Na Na
153 Arjuni Morgaon Water Body Na Na Na Na
154 Arjuni Morgaon Water Body Na Na Na Na
155 Gadchiroli Korchi Bijapar 32 132 38 188
156 Korchi Bodaldand 124 586 147 652
157 Armori Palasgaon 300 1285 338 1400
158 Korchi Pranpur (Rith) Na Na Na Na
159 Kurkheda Halkikanhar Na Na Na Na
160 Korchi Mayalghat 30 139 31 119
161 Korchi Debari 51 246 71 251
162 Korchi Padiyal Jog 32 171 40 144
163 Korchi Charvidand 27 131 29 171
164 Korchi Belar Gondi 42 240 53 219
165 Kurkheda Khedegaon 133 569 148 637
166 Desaiganj (Vadasa) Kasari Tukum 207 932 260 1022
167 Kurkheda Yerkadi 78 391 108 430
168 Kurkheda Gewardha 401 1737 453 1771
169 Korchi Gadheli (Masahat) 10 57 12 50
170 Kurkheda Dongargaon 62 252 83 379
171 Kurkheda Gurnoli 262 1091 289 1170
172 Korchi Pendakodo Na Na Na Na
173 Desaiganj (Vadasa) Kasari Gaoganna Na Na Na Na
174 Kurkheda Umarzari Na Na Na Na
175 Desaiganj (Vadasa) Pimpalgaon 247 1212 251 1366
176 Kurkheda Arattondi 110 618 153 903
177 Armori Nawargaon 6 30 5 20
178 Armori Mulur Chak 11 55 18 71
179 Armori Shankarnagar 232 1091 273 1210
180 Kurkheda Deulgaon 134 569 141 581

120 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

181 Dhanora Marma 12 76 24 112

182 Dhanora Dabba 5 20 7 20
183 Kurkheda Khobramendha 106 467 143 624
184 Armori Kasavi 197 874 224 937
185 Armori Pathargota 305 1340 310 1415
186 Armori Armori 3925 17784 4441 18504
187 Armori Ashta 180 849 243 951
188 Armori Jogisakhara 368 1624 401 1649
189 Dhanora Ranwahi 4 30 5 34
190 Armori Rampur Chak 169 711 168 729
191 Armori Arsoda 559 2389 660 2621
192 Dhanora Murzar 4 26 8 34
193 Dhanora Charwahi 20 158 28 155
194 Dhanora Gotatola 13 49 14 73
195 Dhanora Gatanyeli 17 95 28 134
196 Dhanora Ampayli 14 54 24 116
197 Dhanora Mujalgondi 55 289 67 345
198 Dhanora Khedegaon 67 370 70 343
199 Dhanora Yerkadmowad 360 1571 358 1570
200 Dhanora Darchi 50 259 63 270
201 Dhanora Chavela 124 590 129 580
202 Dhanora Gattepayli 65 352 68 385
203 Dhanora Mendha 60 287 106 473
204 Dhanora Irpundi 1 7 1 6
205 Dhanora Girola 73 591 104 739
206 Dhanora Todemasahat 20 118 32 154
207 Dhanora Yengaon 20 118 30 140
208 Dhanora Munganer 39 223 57 229
209 Dhanora Bodiri 26 151 33 151
210 Dhanora Horakasa 6 44 12 43

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 121

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

211 Dhanora Godalwahi 200 1074 207 1181

212 Dhanora Kuthegaon 74 408 90 445
213 Dhanora Makepayli 8 71 16 70
214 Dhanora Latzora 3 19 3 14
215 Dhanora Rakhatola 48 276 62 293
216 Kurkheda Jayatpur (Rith) Na Na Na Na
217 Korchi Kohaka Masahat Na Na Na Na
218 Korchi Banjari (Rith) Na Na Na Na
219 Korchi Deogad (Rith) Na Na Na Na
220 Armori Manjewada Na Na Na Na
221 Kurkheda Yedaskuhi Masehat Na Na 45 195
222 Dhanora Muranda Na Na Na Na
223 Dhanora Hulondi Na Na Na Na
224 Dhanora Begadi Na Na Na Na
225 Dhanora Phustola 108 426 66 211
226 Dhanora Yedampayli Kh 37 164 35 160
227 Dhanora Bhapada 25 116 26 104
228 Dhanora Jambhalizora 1 19 8 25
229 Gadchiroli Nagweli 16 89 20 119
230 Gadchiroli Korkuti 11 45 10 54
231 Chamorshi Vikaspalli 213 1019 300 1212
232 Etapalli Gumadi M 12 56 14 56
233 Etapalli Paidi 27 159 33 217
234 Etapalli Nawegaon 4 29 8 40
235 Mulchera Garanji 33 189 50 228
236 Mulchera Adangepalli 23 111 21 100
237 Aheri Tondel 12 48 9 38
238 Mulchera Hetalkasa 44 176 48 219
239 Mulchera Gatta (Vangram) 15 80 22 107
240 Mulchera Pulligudam 31 138 56 232

122 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

241 Mulchera Bolepalli 143 732 188 1017

242 Mulchera Morkhandi Rith 4 22 20 82
243 Etapalli Chandanweli (s) 249 1144 327 1334
244 Mulchera Harinagar 147 798 202 886
245 Mulchera Mukali 24 114 38 162
246 Mulchera Mukali Tola 65 330 93 442
247 Mulchera Govindpur 138 750 164 786
248 Mulchera Medhuranagar 99 544 155 698
249 Aheri Watra Bk S 15 68 19 82
250 Aheri Ambezara 24 89 21 104
251 Aheri Yenkabanda 72 321 90 387
252 Aheri Mirkal M 35 182 41 236
253 Aheri Talwada 88 544 68 456
254 Aheri Lowa S 47 193 45 236
255 Aheri Birhadght 29 152 36 185
256 Aheri Naingudam 37 146 46 195
257 Aheri Pattigaon M 21 89 23 123
258 Aheri Khandala 77 402 109 467
259 Aheri Tatigudam 210 920 249 1047
260 Aheri Rajaram 432 2042 485 2340
261 Aheri Devalmari S 431 1708 477 2203
262 Aheri Chhallewada 549 2617 788 3148
263 Aheri Asa M 32 126 29 155
264 Aheri Watra Bk M 29 104 41 156
265 Aheri Watra Kh S 104 399 128 494
266 Aheri Kolamarka 14 37 Na Na
267 Aheri Avalmari 150 707 198 827
268 Aheri Karancha S 38 177 52 226
269 Aheri Joganguda 106 514 119 626
270 Aheri Umanur M 20 98 26 123

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 123

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

271 Aheri Metigudam 71 308 67 387

272 Aheri Konjed 24 153 34 199
273 Aheri Kalled 44 216 49 301
274 Desaiganj (vadasa) Kondhala 858 3637 974 3873
275 Armori Ravi 120 537 151 625
276 Armori Waghala 131 569 406 1634
277 Aheri Pattigaon S Na Na Na Na
278 Aheri Gotelingampalli Na Na Na Na
279 Aheri Watra Kh M Na Na Na Na
280 Aheri Bondra M Na Na Na Na
281 Armori Mulur Na Na Na Na
282 Sironcha Water Body Na Na Na Na
283 Chandrapur Brahmapuri Saigaon Tukum 206 811 267 969
284 Brahmapuri Nilaj 326 1459 352 1557
285 Brahmapuri Belpatali 146 636 168 651
286 Brahmapuri Panchagaon 101 452 106 454
287 Brahmapuri Gangalwadi 489 1997 566 2047
288 Brahmapuri Gogaon 362 1543 417 1605
289 Brahmapuri Chichgaon 322 1395 372 1489
290 Brahmapuri Kosambi Khadasmara 234 967 251 1034
291 Brahmapuri Baradkinhi 651 2771 710 2930
292 Brahmapuri Aksapur 143 598 167 648
293 Brahmapuri Murpar 130 475 138 527
294 Brahmapuri Powanpar 55 214 66 237
295 Brahmapuri Wandra 378 1606 436 1626
296 Brahmapuri Belgaon Kh 44 168 46 188
297 Brahmapuri Ekara 238 1044 281 1096
298 Brahmapuri Rudrapur Rith Na Na Na Na
299 Brahmapuri Selada 13 53 17 61
300 Sindewahi Powanpar 251 1039 66 237

124 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

301 Chandrapur Chak Pimpal Khut 53 239 56 211

302 Sawali Saimara Chak 12 34 12 44
303 Mul Tekadi 464 2046 495 2091
304 Brahmapuri Khatgaon Na Na Na Na
305 Sindewahi Khairi Chak 78 349 103 407
306 Sindewahi Gunjewahi M.N.2 29 105 51 166
307 Mul Gangalwadi 186 816 202 837
308 Mul Ushrada Chak 340 1644 431 1803
309 Chandrapur Pimpal Khunt 96 397 89 344
310 Sindewahi Gunjewahi M.N.1 551 2258 616 2247
311 Sindewahi Mangli Chak 22 78 24 95
312 Sindewahi Chikmara 200 750 197 768
313 Chandrapur Nimbala 174 699 199 716
314 Sindewahi Tambegadi Mendha 242 979 282 1077
315 Sawali Saimara Tuk 137 590 141 575
316 Sawali Mundala 282 1221 310 1276
317 Sawali Mategaon 13 53 17 62
318 Mul Shivapur Ryt. 46 190 68 229
319 Mul Murmadi 124 468 127 534
320 Mul Padzari 28 105 34 114
321 Mul Chikhli 447 1986 519 2199
322 Mul Padzari Chak 24 93 5 25
323 Mul Chak Chikhli No.1 58 254 55 242
324 Mul Chak Kanhalgaon 1 4 Na Na
325 Mul Belgata 144 599 147 633
326 Mul Somnath (N.V.) 53 697 262 451
327 Mul Maroda 951 4329 1039 4190
328 Mul Morwahi Chak 57 269 67 301
329 Chandrapur Doni 74 299 83 277
330 Mul Chitegaon 288 1161 334 1241

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 125

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

331 Sawali Sadagad 77 338 77 334

332 Chandrapur Chak Nimbala 233 979 234 979
333 Sindewahi Khari Golkar Na Na Na Na
334 Chandrapur Waigaon Mokasa 126 552 160 611
335 Chandrapur Nandgur 66 317 73 308
336 Chandrapur Chak Borda 27 106 30 127
337 Pombhurna Ghanoti Tukum 134 563 147 586
338 Chandrapur Chak Waigaon No.2. 106 535 132 560
339 Chandrapur Gondsawari Rayyatwari 203 985 243 1040
340 Chandrapur Ajayapur Raiyyatwari 306 1268 304 1325
341 Chandrapur Borda Indarpawar 317 1652 323 1602
342 Chandrapur Chichpalli 361 1521 432 1572
343 Chandrapur Ghanta Chauki 75 352 85 324
344 Chandrapur Jamrala 87 383 108 435
345 Pombhurna Satara Tukum 103 413 112 404
346 Mul Chikhli No.2 Na Na Na Na
347 Mul Belgata Chak No.1 Na Na Na Na
348 Mul Belgata Chak No.2 Na Na Na Na
349 Pombhurna Umari Potdar 179 792 195 755
350 Pombhurna Umari Tukum 178 1117 183 715
351 Chandrapur Chak Waigaon No.1 Na Na Na Na
352 Chandrapur Walni Chack Na Na Na Na
353 Pombhurna Chak Ghanoti No.1 160 721 205 776
354 Pombhurna Satara Bhosale 71 314 80 320
355 Pombhurna Satara Komti 109 427 121 443
356 Pombhurna Chak Ambe Dhanora 177 695 210 735
357 Pombhurna Chak Borgaon Rith 33 157 49 263
358 Pombhurna Chak Ghanoti No.2 91 400 99 382
359 Gondpipri Ganpur 135 522 133 495
360 Gondpipri Kanhalgaon 197 777 181 668

126 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

361 Gondpipri Pachgaon 50 195 63 224

362 Gondpipri Tomta 78 315 20 82
363 Gondpipri Sonapur Deshpande 288 1172 392 1366
364 Gondpipri Wamanpalli 80 332 93 345
365 Brahmapuri Kharkada 406 1813 476 1966
366 Chhattisgarh Rajnandgaon Chhuikhadan Nachaniya 164 818 237 1063
367 Chhuikhadan Kharra 20 71 32 159
368 Chhuikhadan Murum 35 131 31 119
369 Chhuikhadan Gerukhadan 128 506 151 605
370 Chhuikhadan Daria Konha 8 39 9 46
371 Chhuikhadan Makhurahi Na Na Na Na
372 Chhuikhadan Chuhri Na Na 13 48
373 Chhuikhadan Majgaon 44 207 53 249
374 Chhuikhadan Nawagaon 63 306 82 390
375 Chhuikhadan Tendnbhatha 68 359 82 392
376 Chhuikhadan Sarodhi 82 386 127 500
377 Chhuikhadan Kumhi 63 267 73 328
378 Chhuikhadan Marka Tola 12 39 11 47
379 Chhuikhadan Bhave 52 249 68 309
380 Chhuikhadan Kohkadih Na Na Na Na
381 Chhuikhadan Bardih Na Na Na Na
382 Chhuikhadan Sohariya Na Na Na Na
383 Chhuikhadan Kolambo Na Na Na Na
384 Chhuikhadan Khamhardih Na Na Na Na
385 Chhuikhadan Churii Na Na Na Na
386 Dongargarh Khursipar Kalan 87 392 118 479
387 Dongargarh Kurejhar 26 117 30 121
388 Dongargarh Khampura 84 454 112 557
389 Dongargarh Piparkhar Kalan 114 550 155 691
390 Dongargarh Bhagwantola 76 394 90 466

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 127

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

391 Dongargarh Bhursatola 68 289 81 336

392 Dongargarh Banspahad 84 419 103 506
393 Dongargarh Pithar 22 93 24 111
394 Dongargarh Murarpani Na Na Na Na
395 Dongargarh Damaudahra 62 270 67 314
396 Dongargarh Pitepani 199 907 261 1149
397 Dongargarh Bhalukonha 42 214 49 242
398 Rajnandgaon Pendrideeh 109 532 146 717
399 Dongargarh Tot Kasa 95 456 110 584
400 Dongargarh Alidand 75 351 89 474
401 Dongargarh Ghodtalab 84 363 95 422
402 Dongargarh Gundri Na Na 3 12
403 Rajnandgaon Ghodatalab 188 819 274 1102
404 Rajnandgaon Telinbandha 181 907 241 1187
405 Rajnandgaon Khobha 323 1487 421 1878
406 Rajnandgaon Anko 107 488 130 553
407 Rajnandgaon Job 199 898 249 1088
408 Rajnandgaon Hetadkasa 10 63 14 41
409 Rajnandgaon Bijepar 94 460 127 655
410 Rajnandgaon Jhadi Khairi 131 646 147 777
411 Rajnandgaon Bendandi 103 445 116 578
412 Rajnandgaon Khedepar 25 127 32 155
413 Manpur Mardagota 10 47 18 105
414 Manpur Tukam 18 110 24 123
415 Rajnandgaon Ghorda Na Na Na Na
416 Kawardha Kawardha Barendipani 31 133 37 214
417 Kawardha Bandukunda Alias Siliyari 20 112 34 175
418 Kawardha Dariya 47 245 76 338
419 Kawardha Sonwahi 65 341 131 569
420 Kawardha Bodalpani 117 585 142 650

128 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

421 Kawardha Plot Rol 15 58 16 65

422 Kawardha Barela 7 37 14 56
423 Kawardha Khamraha 15 59 30 123
424 Kawardha Padari Pani 59 225 77 294
425 Kawardha Minminiya 67 319 105 420
426 Kawardha Kanhari 69 320 108 440
427 Kawardha Ghathola 9 40 Na Na
428 Kawardha Kurma 37 148 43 182
429 Kawardha Bigarbharri 19 128 37 138
430 Kawardha Saral Patera 86 408 125 504
431 Kawardha Songhari 91 449 101 553
432 Kawardha Bakharipani Na Na Na Na
433 Madhya Pradesh Balaghat Lanji Danditola Na Na Na Na
434 Lanji Mukatola Na Na Na Na
435 Lanji Tatikalan 30 146 52 233
436 Lanji Katiparkalan 25 131 32 124
437 Lanji Bapi(bareli) Na Na Na Na
438 Lanji Bapi(bordi) Na Na Na Na
439 Lanji Baigatola Na Na Na Na
440 Lanji Sitapala Na Na Na Na
441 Lanji Nawagarh Na Na Na Na
442 Lanji Janwahi Na Na Na Na
443 Lanji Baghnadi Na Na Na Na
444 Lanji Lendejhari Na Na Na Na
445 Lanji Ghoghra Na Na Na Na
446 Lanji Dudamjhiriya Na Na Na Na
447 Lanji Lanjitola Na Na Na Na
448 Lanji Lodhiwada Na Na Na Na
449 Lanji Na Na Na Na
450 Baihar 29 157 42 193

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 129

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.38:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Kanha-
Navegaon-Nagzira-
Tadoba-Indravati

130 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.39:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kanha-
Navegaon-Nagzira-
Tadoba-Indravati
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

KANHA TO NAVEGAON-NAGZIRA-TADOBA-INDRAVATI 131

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

INDRAVATI-UDANTI- Figure 2.40:

Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger

SITANADI-SUNEBEDA movement between

Indravati- Udanti-
Sitanadi-Sunebeda
Corridor as depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE
Currently the tiger population in this landscape is low
with Indravati not being assessed due to insurgency.
However due to the sheer size of the landscape the
area has high potential for tiger conservation in the
future. The landscape also holds the last pure gene
pool of the Asiatic wild swamp buffalo. The area is
ridden with poverty and therefore biotic pressure on
the forest and the corridor are high. With government
driven economic incentives and social upliftment
these pressures are likely to reduce in the future giving
a chance to wildlife for recuperation. Currently the
national and state highways that pass through the
corridor do not pose to be a barrier but care needs to
be taken for control of development along these linear
features, as is happening along national highway
number 43. This area also has potential for mineral
extraction and care need to be taken that appropriate
mitigation measures are implemented when granting
permissions to such projects so as not to compromise
on the conservation objectives of this corridor.
Indravati - Pamed WLS
Currently the habitat connectivity between Indravati
Indravati-Udanti-Sitanadi-Sunebeda
and Pamed WLS is good and should enable wildlife to
move between these protected areas with ease. Habitat size 41211 Km2
However, in the future infrastructural development in Source Population NA
this region should consider the importance of Size of Source NA
incorporating wildlife friendly mitigation measures so NA
that the corridor value of the habitat is not
Protected Areas Indravati Tiger Reserve
compromised.
Udanti-Sitanadi Tiger Reserve
Sunebeda WLS
Pamed WLS
Corridors Indravati-Udanti-Sitanadi
Udanti-Sitanadi-Sunebeda
Indravati-Pamed WLS

132 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.41:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Indravati- Udanti-
Sitanadi-Sunebeda
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 2.9)

INDRAVATI-UDANTI-SITANADI-SUNEBEDA 133
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

1 Odisha Nuapada Boden Patdarha 355 1605 405 1830

2 Chhattisgarh Kanker Bhanupratappur Jalhur 5 21 5 18
3 Bhanupratappur Kinari 101 522 128 546
4 Bhanupratappur Kathali 68 372 84 412
5 Kanker Chiwranj 86 380 90 402
6 Bhanupratappur Baskuhud 125 600 149 743
7 Bhanupratappur Niche Tonka 31 165 37 170
8 Narharpur Basanwahi 565 2970 672 3260
9 Bhanupratappur Banoli 69 302 83 348
10 Kanker Pidhapal 229 1039 247 1202
11 Kanker Kotgaon(uper) 5 28 13 67
12 Antahgarh NA NA NA NA
13 Bhanupratappur Kuwapani 120 608 151 701
14 Kanker Kumkakudum 6 36 6 46
15 Narharpur Bangabari 228 1108 302 1240
16 Kanker Tultuli 149 732 171 754
17 Kanker Iradah 92 523 108 572
18 Kanker Kanagaon 58 279 70 339
19 Narharpur Sainunda 214 1056 238 1140
20 Bhanupratappur Uper Tonka 37 186 51 268
21 Bhanupratappur Dhaneli 144 813 168 931
22 Bhanupratappur Bhurka 33 156 33 143
23 Narharpur Tiriyarpani 39 160 57 217
24 Kanker Murragaon 36 190 36 205 Table 2.9.
25 Kanker Bhaisgaon 63 308 89 449 Villages within the Least
26 Kanker Mujalgondi 9 49 10 50 Cost Pathway Corridor
connecting Indravati-
27 Narharpur Nishanharra 56 313 82 401 Udanti-Sitanadi-
28 Kanker Malajkudum 51 269 57 315 Sunebeda as shown in
Fig. 2.41
29 Antahgarh Marmakonadi 7 43 10 46

134 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

30 Antahgarh Gumjhir 70 368 81 434

31 Antahgarh Bulawand 118 581 176 740
32 Antahgarh Garda 21 129 30 146
33 Antahgarh NA NA NA NA
34 Bastar Keshkal Mahurbeda 21 125 33 156
35 Keshkal Kupagondi 25 126 26 153
36 Keshkal Khalemurvend 189 886 219 992
37 Keshkal Kukdadah 49 246 65 301
38 Keshkal Umaradah 23 124 23 135
39 Keshkal Chiprel 184 899 212 1032
40 Keshkal Matenga 57 342 69 363
41 Keshkal Farasgaon(murnar) 68 315 74 360
42 Keshkal Sendurmeta 19 101 25 131
43 Keshkal Uparmurvend 70 334 83 411
44 Keshkal Dadargadh 35 146 33 161
45 Keshkal Baijanpuri 170 787 242 1060
46 Keshkal GarhSiliyara 35 177 NA NA
47 Keshkal Surdongar 602 2813 NA NA
48 Narayanpur Kumnar 2 10 2 14
49 Narayanpur Jubada 93 461 104 503
50 Narayanpur Gummarka 22 124 49 221
51 Narayanpur Farasbeda 22 121 27 133
52 Narayanpur Kodnar 22 107 45 194
53 Narayanpur Harbel 35 174 41 207
54 Narayanpur NA NA NA NA
55 Narayanpur NA NA NA NA
56 Dantewada Bijapur Murumwada 48 248 56 281
57 Bijapur Jatlur 72 335 80 355
58 Bijapur Padmeta 27 150 28 171

INDRAVATI-UDANTI-SITANADI-SUNEBEDA 135
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

59 Bhopalpattanam Sandrel 43 288 67 300

60 Bhopalpattanam Bhandarpal 54 236 68 254
61 Bhopalpattanam Pawrel 84 429 124 472
62 Bhopalpattanam Dharavaram 45 230 52 263
63 Bhopalpattanam Penkram 72 311 84 320
64 Bhopalpattanam Ilmidi 330 1628 360 1797
65 Bhopalpattanam Chintakonta 105 536 117 623
66 Bhopalpattanam Bhusapur(bhusaguda) 46 227 64 272
67 Bhopalpattanam Galgam 69 355 72 314
68 Bijapur NA NA NA NA
69 Bijapur Telaunugur 7 30 5 24
70 Dhamtari Kurud MulgaonF.v. 54 279 108 409
71 Raipur Bindranawagarh Besrajhar 41 184 41 161
72 Bindranawagarh Nagarar 23 129 40 164
73 Bindranawagarh Dhawalpurdih 458 2016 673 2456
74 Bindranawagarh Jarandih 43 214 65 238
75 Bindranawagarh Mohanda 274 1277 374 1477
76 Bindranawagarh Toribhui 5 18 5 20
77 Bindranawagarh Amamora 65 343 105 406
78 Bindranawagarh Jangaldhawaipur 128 560 160 588
79 Bindranawagarh Bodapala 10 55 15 62
80 Bindranawagarh Dabnai 48 264 66 299
81 Bindranawagarh Farsara 30 112 28 104
82 Bindranawagarh Tupenga 9 28 12 43
83 Bindranawagarh Chhindola 52 275 78 297
84 Bindranawagarh Matarmal NA NA NA NA
85 Bindranawagarh Nartora NA NA NA NA
86 Bindranawagarh Kodomal NA NA NA NA
87 Raipur Bindranawagarh Satmar NA NA NA NA

136 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.42:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Indravati-
Udanti-Sitanadi-
Sunebeda

INDRAVATI-UDANTI-SITANADI-SUNEBEDA 137
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.43:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Indravati-
Udanti-Sitanadi-
Sunebeda landscape
in the year 1992 and
2012

138 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

SIMLIPAL-SATKOSIA

Figure 2.44: Currently tiger densities in both Simlipal

Potential habitat and Satkosia are depressed and there is
connectivity for tiger lack of a source population to ensure tiger
movement between occupancy within the larger landscape.
Simlipal-Satkosia Considering that with appropriate
Corridor as depicted by protection and managerial inputs tiger
CIRCUITSCAPE model populations in both these reserves will
revive , then their long term survival would
depend on gene flow between these
populations. Besides Satkosia and Simlipal
habitat connectivity with Hadagad WLS
and Kapilas WLS need to be recognized
and protected. The corridor between
Satkosia and Simlipal is tenuous , long and
consists of fragmented forests patches
interspersed with agriculture , mines and
varied human uses like thermal power
plant. Major restorative inputs are required
in this landscape to keep this corridor
functional.

Simlipal-Satkosia
2
Habitat size 34057 Km
Source Population Simlipal
Size of Source 12-34
Protected Areas Simlipal
Satkosia
Corridors Simlipal-Satkosia

SIMLIPAL-SATKOSIA 139
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.45:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Simlipal-Satkosia
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in
Table 2.10

140 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

1 Odisha Jajapur Sukinda Nagada 56 247 55 307

2 Sukinda Guhiasal 45 241 32 155
3 Sukinda Rahangi NA NA NA NA
4 Sukinda NA NA NA NA
5 Kendujhar Anandapur(P) Kontala 41 230 66 271
6 Anandapur(P) Gendaliabasa 29 147 29 140
7 Ghatgaon Baiganpal 264 1204 368 1492
8 Ghatgaon Banmahuldiha 179 864 217 986
9 Anandapur(P) Palabani 26 154 42 201
10 Ghatgaon Balijodi 170 971 224 1133
11 Ghasipura Salukdahi 64 341 74 310
12 Ghasipura Dargudisila 78 329 89 373
13 Ghatgaon Upardiha 473 2443 740 3238
14 Anandapur(P) Badudighara 70 395 86 455
15 Anandapur(P) Hatochapal 17 63 39 153
16 Daitari Badajumei 21 83 26 127
17 Anandapur(P) Baigundi 62 359 79 404
18 Anandapur(P) Panasijharan 158 766 209 893
19 Anandapur(P) Baniajodi 188 973 249 1214
20 Anandapur(P) Bhalughara 132 642 152 610
21 Anandapur(P) Singanali 37 177 49 264
22 Anandapur(P) Kantala 47 255 48 222
23 Anandapur(P) Haribeda 23 131 31 160
24 Anandapur(P) Santospur 121 610 136 621
25 Harichandanpur Billa 313 1767 478 2367
26 Harichandanpur Sagadapata 499 2403 595 2708
Table 2.10:
Villages within the Least
27 Harichandanpur Barigaon 211 1127 273 1241
Cost Pathway Corridor 28 Harichandanpur Hayarapur 69 397 110 540
connecting Simlipal- 29 Harichandanpur Gounighasa 217 1104 369 1424
Satkosia as shown in
Fig. 2.45 30 Daitari Suakati 80 454 114 594

SIMLIPAL-SATKOSIA 141
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

31 Harichandanpur Palabani 51 236 42 201

32 Harichandanpur Gaduana 113 539 144 691
33 Anandapur(P) Mandapada 20 119 31 148
34 Daitari Revana(kha) 50 257 63 271
35 Daitari Talapada 112 553 205 969
36 Daitari Sandhiaposi NA NA NA NA
37 Anandapur(P) Gendabasa NA NA NA NA
38 Mayurbhanj Udala Hillblock No.24 261 1388 352 1593
39 Sharata Gourchandrapur 453 2354 549 2817
40 Sharata Sarat 626 3349 786 3899
41 Mahuldiha Sat Kosia Forest Cluster 64 323 87 373
42 Mahuldiha Duara Suni 84 531 125 602
43 Mahuldiha Patar Pada 49 413 59 606
44 Sharata Skadabahali 240 1296 302 1557
45 Mahuldiha Pana Posi 123 550 134 603
46 Mahuldiha Asur Khal 91 507 112 616
47 Sharata Noto 323 1658 373 1705
48 Mahuldiha Goudia Bahali 180 916 209 975
49 Mahuldiha Ghulu Ghulia 291 1525 398 2120
50 Mahuldiha Jhar Jhari 24 136 36 205
51 Mahuldiha Baula 42 208 58 299
52 Mahuldiha Bhalia Dal 162 877 209 1154
53 Mahuldiha Jamu Nanda 242 1107 290 1405
54 Mahuldiha Bag Dafa 198 1043 252 1152
55 Mahuldiha Sat Kosia 195 1189 326 1658
56 Mahuldiha Satkosia Amalnamahill Block 41 225 50 240
57 Debagarh Kundheigola Budhapal 251 1333 314 1307
58 Kundheigola Garia Pali 32 153 42 205
59 Reamal Poipani 15 70 19 79
60 Kundheigola Rairatan Pur 45 221 61 266

142 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

61 Kundheigola Mamurikhola 14 57 29 114

62 Kundheigola Khanda Dhua 97 393 94 366
63 Kundheigola Pancha Mahala 53 276 58 279
64 Kundheigola Kendupal 30 155 38 189
65 Kundheigola Baidya Sadhu Bahal 22 106 38 153
66 Kundheigola Haldia Khol(k) NA NA NA NA
67 Kundheigola Talranijharan NA NA NA NA
68 Kundheigola Baisanalia NA NA 1 1
69 Kundheigola Katasara NA NA NA NA
70 Kundheigola Tamkia Khol 1 2 NA NA
71 Kundheigola Srungipal 60 313 66 340
72 Kundheigola Deo Jharan 30 145 37 156
73 Kundheigola Duduka Jharan 28 156 36 161
74 Kundheigola Kadam Jhari NA NA NA NA
75 Kundheigola Arkha Pal 24 125 34 144
76 Kundheigola Tungamal 155 814 183 893
77 Kundheigola Kapagola 57 242 61 275
78 Kundheigola Kamar Pal 83 430 89 378
79 Kundheigola Gurujanga 87 423 113 481
80 Kundheigola Kundheigola 336 1722 420 1808
81 Kundheigola Dalak 55 274 80 329
82 Kundheigola Chhalak 60 321 100 520
83 Kundheigola Jharadihi(k) 44 195 52 233
84 Kundheigola Kanjiamba 90 432 106 516
85 Kundheigola Hrudapali 13 72 14 71
86 Kundheigola Thianal 49 259 61 288
87 Kundheigola Tutabari 41 225 62 307
88 Kundheigola Tal Bahal 34 205 50 215
89 Kundheigola Chadei Mara 79 435 115 533
90 Kundheigola Tipei Jharan 1 1 NA NA

SIMLIPAL-SATKOSIA 143
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

91 Kundheigola Jambu Munda 48 225 84 346

92 Kundheigola Kankada Jharan 21 138 39 183
93 Kundheigola Amba Chua 12 51 16 73
94 Kundheigola Para 242 1193 334 1285
95 Kundheigola Sunanali NA NA 3 11
96 Kundheigola Bhalupal NA NA NA NA
97 Kundheigola Uparrani Jharan NA NA NA NA
98 Kundheigola Kudbila NA NA NA NA
99 Kundheigola Mamuritap NA NA 5 20
100 Kundheigola Kanjiamba Matha NA NA NA NA
101 Kundheigola Dhaura Khaman NA NA 11 44
102 Anugul Kaniha Gualiar 26 111 37 195
103 Rengali Damsite Bajrakot 624 3134 788 3341
104 Kaniha Palasapasi 19 85 NA NA
105 Kaniha Nialu 99 469 137 520
106 Chhendipada Hariharpur 47 244 59 253
107 Kaniha Birabhuin 16 90 27 98
108 Kaniha Baudabeda 62 327 92 357
109 Samal Barrage Gaunighasa 206 1067 305 1125
110 Kaniha Lodhajhari 110 514 146 636
111 Kaniha Titirima 249 1084 325 1226
112 Kaniha Kendukhaman 45 234 67 281
113 Kaniha Andhari 21 89 27 95
114 Kaniha Jhadabandha 1 4 NA NA
115 Kaniha Brahmandei 107 520 134 613
116 Kaniha Sunduri 95 532 128 520
117 Kaniha Sapakata 101 451 134 555
118 Samal Barrage Seepur 852 3797 661 2627
119 Samal Barrage Karnapal 317 1473 300 1082
120 Kaniha Nalam 374 1821 511 1902

144 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

121 Kaniha Atabira 15 65 16 82

122 Chhendipada Mandua 86 423 118 456
123 Kaniha Bhajipur 15 78 23 127
124 Samal Barrage Kusumpal 117 596 155 609
125 Chhendipada Puriabeda 31 127 38 132
126 Kaniha Dalaka 54 264 77 330
127 Chhendipada Haribereni 53 249 67 314
128 Kaniha Kanumanpur 130 743 179 804
129 Kaniha Poipal 155 716 185 777
130 Samal Barrage Siling 137 692 190 756
131 Kaniha Durgapur 312 1576 387 1468
132 Samal Barrage Parabil 410 1928 441 1858
133 Kaniha Kiajhar 69 301 84 359
134 Kaniha Talapada 235 1193 332 1402
135 Samal Barrage Gaham 636 2777 576 2504
136 Samal Barrage Biru 335 1597 452 1858
137 Chhendipada Kanaloi 410 1953 517 2219
138 Samal Barrage Bulajhar 91 431 131 477
139 Samal Barrage Dadari 1 2 3 11
140 Samal Barrage Kashia 3 17 15 56
141 Samal Barrage Dholagandia 27 114 34 123
142 Samal Barrage Kulei 301 1369 362 1486
143 Samal Barrage Balijharan 32 203 55 227
144 Samal Barrage Danarabeda 104 517 116 507
145 Samal Barrage Tumugola 357 1733 253 1131
146 Handapa Laxminpriyapur 40 162 58 228
147 Handapa Rajanpal 34 157 48 177
148 Handapa Golasar 57 299 107 433
149 Handapa Baliamba 26 126 44 172
150 Samal Barrage Jharan NA NA NA NA

SIMLIPAL-SATKOSIA 145
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

151 Kaniha Arakhadihi(arakhadahi) NA NA 20 111

152 Handapa Kholaregada 34 169 43 213
153 Handapa Nuaashrubahal 26 103 26 115
154 Handapa Madhupur 84 404 118 475
155 Kaniha Fulajhari NA NA 26 111
156 Kaniha Talabahal NA NA NA NA
157 Samal Barrage Patramunda NA NA NA NA
158 Kaniha Tolakapal NA NA NA NA
159 Handapa Parbatipur 37 194 54 264
160 Chhendipada Sudagola Sara 5 13 7 13
161 Handapa Ichhapur 290 1243 354 1316
162 Handapa Ashrubahal 106 480 139 596
163 Handapa Nagajharan 100 479 115 487
164 Handapa Khandabara 88 394 104 482
165 Handapa Badibahal 60 291 73 342
166 Handapa Jamunali 127 620 174 737
167 Handapa Kadalimunda 321 1333 362 1593
168 Thakurgarh Batrakhol 32 195 48 227
169 Jarapada (P) Badamula 72 346 89 371
170 Jarapada (P) Katada 361 1715 492 1967
171 Jarapada (P) Kandhakorada 41 176 59 251
172 Purunakot Rodasinga 153 752 188 885
173 Thakurgarh Ghanamundia NA NA NA NA
174 Jarapada (P) Para Forest Beat NA NA NA NA
175 Purunakot Sitakoili(siti Koli) 35 209 40 206
176 Purunakot Antulia 234 1223 295 1295
177 Purunakot Betar 20 129 34 133
178 Jarapada (P) Ogi(ugi) 482 2469 596 2445
179 Purunakot Tabada 72 361 108 447
180 Purunakot Kandhakuile 79 378 93 435

146 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

181 Purunakot Manikajori 173 815 207 957

182 Purunakot Khalamba 14 70 18 91
183 Purunakot Bruti 73 366 103 491
184 Purunakot Jaganathpur 245 1171 277 1196
185 Purunakot Hinsrida 55 269 64 260
186 Jarapada (P) Parajungle 23 139 55 218
187 Dhenkanal Kamakshyanagar (P) Dangapal 236 1255 302 1574
188 Parajang (P) Tampei 97 476 108 493
189 Parajang (P) Tipeijharan 84 354 114 424
190 Parajang (P) Rangathali 408 1855 484 2157
191 Parajang (P) Madarnga Munda 44 192 62 272
192 Kamakshyanagar (P) Dansanali 38 204 50 259
193 Parajang (P) Padapatia 65 327 86 361
194 Parajang (P) Bhejia 129 601 170 731
195 Parajang (P) Chandapur 477 2272 566 2256
196 Parajang (P) Sundarmundi 38 182 53 297
197 Parajang (P) Mahabirod 714 3320 854 3612
198 Kamakshyanagar (P) Sasapasi 302 1386 341 1578
199 Parajang (P) Jaka 216 1117 330 1242
200 Parajang (P) Patuapali 38 185 51 216
201 Parajang (P) Sarakishor Pal 265 1240 280 1195
202 Kamakshyanagar (P) Tarinipasi 84 440 95 564
203 Parajang (P) Patharagarh 131 703 198 874
204 Kamakshyanagar (P) Kandhara 472 2382 599 2476
205 Parajang (P) Manikamara 281 1598 416 1858
206 Kamakshyanagar (P) Koi(ka) 68 392 87 416
207 Kamakshyanagar (P) Urbengi 132 660 166 806
208 Kamakshyanagar (P) Palasadangi 144 738 193 936
209 Parajang (P) Kadapada 197 975 275 1234
210 Parajang (P) Basulei 923 4330 1121 4682

SIMLIPAL-SATKOSIA 147
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

211 Kamakshyanagar (P) Balikuma 105 596 151 792

212 Parajang (P) Gola Gadia 124 529 169 620
213 Parajang (P) Akhupal 40 129 20 95
214 Parajang (P) Pakatamunda 83 432 123 496
215 Parajang (P) Kuturia 246 1172 312 1444
216 Parajang (P) Mahanapasi 108 470 136 626
217 Parajang (P) Bagha Munda 117 514 150 799
218 Kamakshyanagar (P) Sahala 96 664 118 635
219 Kamakshyanagar (P) Jhanjiri Berena No-2 55 278 73 326
220 Kamakshyanagar (P) Phulajhari 20 105 26 102
221 Kamakshyanagar (P) Batagan 338 1852 434 2261
222 Kamakshyanagar (P) Suaginali 42 287 63 329
223 Kamakshyanagar (P) Sunia 20 122 28 129
224 Kamakshyanagar (P) Rangamatia 21 110 23 110
225 Kamakshyanagar (P) Kadabasanta 25 138 26 156
226 Kamakshyanagar (P) Belabasanta 59 273 80 418
227 Parajang (P) Bautinali NA NA NA NA
228 Parajang (P) Jamunali NA NA 174 737
229 Parajang (P) Raijhara NA NA 1 1
230 Sambalpur Naktideul Bagbar 68 364 88 356
231 Naktideul Sadhubahal 56 311 82 341
232 Naktideul Kundeijori 4 21 8 25
233 Naktideul Chadchadi 19 110 30 123
234 Naktideul Bindpur 131 633 156 672
235 Naktideul Angabira 100 561 137 665
236 Naktideul Kaing 20 94 25 127
237 Naktideul Sankhpur 31 158 58 198
238 Naktideul Luburi 63 340 75 356
239 Naktideul Hill NA NA NA NA

148 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.46:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Simlipal-
Satkosia

SIMLIPAL-SATKOSIA 149
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.47:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Simlipal-
Satkosia Corridor
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

150 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

NAGARJUNSAGAR -SRI VENKATESWARA NP

Figure 2.48: The habitat corridor between Nagarjun Sagar Sri Sailam Tiger
Potential habitat Reserve and Sri Venkestwara NP is mostly through forested habitat
connectivity for tiger and passes through three protected areas Gundla Brahmeswaram
movement between WLS, Sri Lankamalleswaram WLS and Sri Penusila Narasimha
Nagarjunsagar -Sri WLS. However, there are several national and state highways
Venkestwara NP cutting across the corridor. These need to be appropriately
Corridor as depicted by mitigated by under and over Wildlife Passes so that they do not
CIRCUITSCAPE model become barriers to wildlife movement .the major bottleneck is a
patch of revenue land and township of Sidhavatam which
constitutes about 2 km of the corridor stretch which would benefit
from restorative inputs and ensuring that development in the
stretch does not become a barrier to wildlife movement. The tiger
density in NSTR especially in Gundla Brahmeswaram WLS is
recovering, once this population increases dispersing tigers are
likely to recolonize Sri Venkateswara NP from where they have
become locally extinct. To enhance this process reintroduction /
supplementation of tigers to Sri Venkestwara NP may also be
considered.

Nagarjunsagar -Sri Venkateswara NP

Habitat size 13628 Km2
Source Population NSTR
Size of Source 53-66
Protected Areas NSTR
Gundla Brahmeswaram WLS
Sri Lankamalleshwaram
Sri Penusila Narasimha WLS
Sri Venkateswara NP
Corridors NSTR-Sri Lankamalleswaram
Sri Lankamalleshwaram- Sri Venkateswara NP
Sri Penusila Narasimha - Sri Venkateswara

NAGARJUNSAGAR -SRI VENKESTWARA NP 151

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.49:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Nagarjunsagar -Sri
Venkestwara NP
overlaid by village map
(the village numbers
are referenced in
Table 2.11)

152 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

2 Andhra Pradesh Nellore Venkatgiri Vembuluru 807 3525 1043 3893

9 Chittoor Rajampet Balupalle 71 1041 77 279
10 Chandragiri Karakambadi (Rural) 1698 7173 2684 10504
14 Cuddapah Badvel Jangamrajupalle 644 2909 317 1262
19 Proddatur Machupalle NA NA NA NA
22 Rajampet Pulapathuru 608 2575 544 2018
24 Sidhout Vontithatipalle 261 1146 354 1356
25 Sidhout Mulapalle 92 396 119 463
27 Rajampet Rollamadugu 219 1092 174 680
28 Rajampet Rollamadugu 219 1092 174 680
31 Proddatur/Badvel Thippireddipalle 282 1195 330 1296
32 Proddatur/Badvel Mudireddipalle 288 1277 328 1260
33 Proddatur/Badvel Mittamanipalle 788 3681 1079 4253
34 Proddatur/Badvel Nandyalampeta 2136 9673 2856 11457
35 Proddatur/Badvel No Data NA NA NA NA
Table 2.11.
36 Sidhout Jyothi 312 1418 388 1449
Villages within the Least
37 Sidhout Machupalle 554 2438 610 2426
cost Pathway Corridor
between 38 Sidhout Gundlamoola 87 397 106 430
Nagarjunsagar -Sri
39 Sidhout Kanumalapalle 36 181 62 499
Venkestwara NP as
shown in Fig. 2.49 42 Rayachoti Gadikota 700 2759 811 3093

NAGARJUNSAGAR -SRI VENKESTWARA NP 153

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.50:
Potential bottlenecks ,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Nagarjunsagar Sri
Sailam TR -Sri
Venkestwara NP

154 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.51:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the
Nagarjunsagar -Sri
Sailam TR-
Venkestwara NP
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

NAGARJUNSAGAR -SRI VENKESTWARA NP 155

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

SAHYADRI-RADHANAGARI -GOA

The tiger population of the Sahyadris was Figure 2.52:

connected with that of Goa through the Least Cost Pathway
Radhangari Wildlife Sanctuary and further corridor for Tiger
southwards with that of Anshi-Dandeli in movement within
Karnataka through the ridge-top forests of the Sahyadri-Radhanagri-
Western Ghats. Tiger numbers estimated for the Goa overlaid with
Sahyadris (20-22 tigers within 560 km2) seem to village map (the village
be over estimates. numbers are
referenced in
Table 2.12)

Sahyadri-Radhanagri- Goa
Habitat size 44453 Km2
Source Population NA
Size of Source NA
Protected Areas Koyana WLS
Chandoli NP
Radhanagri WLS
Madei WLS (Goa)
Corridors Koyana-Chandoli
Chandoli-Radhanagari
Radhanagri-Madei

156 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
4 Maharashtra Kolhapur Shahuwadi Gavadi 124 603 133 575
5 Radhanagari Savarde 282 1447 344 1696
6 Shahuwadi Kumbhavde 111 631 170 753
7 Panhala Padasali 38 195 42 199
8 Shahuwadi Barki 125 615 125 668
9 Shahuwadi Chalanwadi 42 178 45 164
10 Shahuwadi Udgiri 315 1265 255 1123
11 Shahuwadi Paraleninai 366 1762 348 1628
12 Shahuwadi Amba 235 1136 256 1195
13 Shahuwadi Talavade 74 392 145 554
14 Shahuwadi Masnoli 223 1126 234 1190
15 Panhala Washi 60 336 76 427
16 Shahuwadi Gajapur 334 1736 447 1950
17 Shahuwadi Vishalgad 84 540 107 588
18 Shahuwadi Anuskura 256 1278 246 1089
19 Shahuwadi Injoli 82 479 101 527
20 Bavda Katali 170 769 116 544
21 Panhala Kolik 148 756 184 1053
22 Satara Patan Gothane 48 227 63 289
22 Kolhapur Panhala Gothane 24 146 26 138
23 Bavda Kode Bk 152 838 185 983
24 Bavda Asalaj 260 1296 320 1619
25 Bhudragad Anturli 173 762 175 807
26 Bavda Vesaraf 97 472 104 525
27 Bavda Sangashi 72 343 77 364
Table 2.12: 28 Bavda Gagan Bavda 396 1909 353 1588
Villages within the Least 29 Bavda Lakhamapur 88 486 88 445
Cost Pathway Corridor
30 Bavda Borbet 125 629 122 645
between Sahyadri-
Radhanagri-Goa as 31 Bavda Narveli 42 194 53 263
shown in Fig. 2.52 32 Bavda Taliye Kh. 56 282 91 393

SAHYADRI-RADHANAGARI -GOA CORRIDOR 157

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

33 Radhanagari Manbet 181 968 175 879

34 Chandgad Isapur 110 412 102 376
35 Bhudragad Shivdav 286 1313 222 958
36 Bhudragad Chikkewadi 7 28 7 28
37 Bhudragad Mathagaon 328 1490 323 1514
38 Bhudragad Mani 24 114 35 148
39 Ajra Kitvade 191 1019 222 974
40 Chandgad Mirwel 85 268 88 258
41 Chandgad Kodali 462 2058 350 1490
42 Sawantwadi Kumbhavade 58 236 72 284
43 Patan Bopoli 112 508 126 604
44 Patan Thankal 82 418 90 387
45 Patan Nechal 71 301 83 392
46 Patan Mendheghar 61 272 62 296
47 Pajapur Walwad 131 626 129 509
48 Pajapur Kolamb 99 517 150 623
49 Dodamarg Khadpade Tarf Banda 11 37 17 66
50 Dodamarg Bhekurli 44 182 38 136
51 Dodamarg Terwan 118 415 111 322
52 Lanja Machal 96 415 95 427
53 Chiplun Pophali Bk.(n.v.) 145 648 154 644
54 Ratnagiri Chiplun Pophali 967 4425 895 3609
55 Sangameshwar Bamnoli 247 848 187 609
56 Pajapur Zarye 131 486 116 390
57 Sangameshwar Ninave 51 208 45 152
58 Lanja Palu 252 1219 180 763
59 Chiplun Mundhe Tarf Savarda 194 858 187 740
60 Chiplun Durgwadi Kh. 262 1086 262 916
61 Chiplun Durgwadi 118 538 77 303
62 Sangameshwar Ozare Bk. 266 1044 237 754

158 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

63 Lanja Kurang 163 711 154 561

64 Lanja Kondage 200 862 193 733
65 Chiplun Manjutri 36 157 19 66
66 Sangameshwar Karandewadi (N.V.) 84 345 83 245
67 Sangameshwar Khadi Kolvan 147 529 118 344
68 Lanja Khorninko 218 791 191 586
69 Sangameshwar Dakhin 121 627 165 580
70 Sangameshwar Murshi 239 1010 230 811
71 Sangameshwar Bhadkambe 315 1358 313 1273
72 Sangameshwar Bhovade 205 974 208 795
73 Sangameshwar Devade 393 1651 353 1253
74 Sangameshwar Wadi Adhishti 62 246 49 159
75 Lanja Prabhanvalli 580 2502 618 2377
76 Lanja Bhambed 680 3042 663 2679
77 Lanja Hardkhale 346 1608 344 1443
78 Pajapur Yeradav 131 543 135 487
79 Pajapur Pangari Kh. 106 434 63 221
80 Pajapur Kajirda 240 1007 212 751
81 Pajapur Karak 348 1420 390 1501
82 Kudal Nileli 118 559 161 576
83 Satara Patan Torane 59 280 74 371
84 Patan Waghane 42 185 32 125
85 Sindhudurg Vaibhavvadi Jambhavade 93 469 88 406
86 Vaibhavvadi Mounde 114 474 114 384
87 Patan Ghatmatha 32 195 43 197
88 Patan Kemase 21 108 15 78
89 Patan Kondhavale 126 588 160 818
90 Patan Govare 84 366 121 624
91 Vaibhavvadi Sadure 206 879 243 821
92 Patan Patharpunj 45 198 56 260

SAHYADRI-RADHANAGARI -GOA CORRIDOR 159

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

93 Patan Kolane 48 216 68 302

95 Vaibhavvadi Ainari 153 648 148 566
96 Vaibhavvadi Bhui Bawada 298 1205 310 1102
97 Kudal Wasoli 151 569 152 509
98 Vaibhavvadi Ringewadi 89 334 87 281
99 Vaibhavvadi Kurli 423 1941 297 1181
100 Dodamarg Zolambe 262 1263 266 1104
101 Dodamarg Hewale 96 430 106 449
102 Dodamarg Fukeri 70 300 79 309
103 Sawantwadi Fansavade 57 395 48 251
104 Vaibhavvadi Bhattiwadi 80 332 90 285
105 Vaibhavvadi Karul 277 1204 280 1058
106 Vaibhavvadi Navale 201 1005 222 939
107 Vaibhavvadi Shirale Arule 60 272 72 229
108 Sawantwadi Konas 114 503 132 487
109 Kudal More 161 764 184 931
110 Sawantwadi Kesari 148 653 152 700
111 Kankavli Yevteshwargaon 101 441 108 408
112 Kudal Narur 217 1090 283 1112
113 Sawantwadi Shirshinge 468 2132 484 1810
114 Kudal Sakirde 46 204 56 192
115 Kudal Durganagar 108 456 120 430
116 Kudal Bharani 236 1091 250 1043
117 Kudal Ghotage 411 1622 406 1550
118 Kudal Pangrad 292 1284 287 1055
119 Kudal Nerur K.narur 399 1757 440 1633
120 Kudal Pulas 144 730 165 701
121 Sawantwadi Gharap 74 328 64 283
122 Kudal Anjivade 60 226 61 189
123 Kudal Shivapur 251 988 294 1055

160 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)

124 Kudal Keravade K.narur 253 1182 313 1373

125 Kudal Chafeli 81 416 122 473
126 Kudal Upavade 119 522 153 497
127 Sawantwadi Sawarwad 210 1166 232 1231
128 Sawantwadi Sangeli 623 2837 698 2855
129 Sawantwadi Verle 469 1965 473 1754
130 Sawantwadi Kalambist 552 2210 553 2005
131 Sawantwadi Ambegaon 221 1083 267 1163
132 Sawantwadi Ovaliye 152 624 157 621
133 Sawantwadi Madkhol 742 3448 829 3539
134 Sawantwadi Parpoli 181 751 178 593
135 Sawantwadi Devsu 177 722 171 741
136 Sawantwadi Kegad 115 562 129 497
137 Sawantwadi Danoli 75 305 79 263
138 Sawantwadi Chaukul 400 1555 397 1254
139 Sawantwadi Udeli 2 4 3 8
140 Dodamarg Terwanmedhe 125 478 120 504
141 Dodamarg Ghatiwade 7 35 12 60
142 Dodamarg Palye 111 517 113 474
143 Dodamarg Sonawal 91 415 112 515
144 Patan Valvane NA NA NA NA
145 Bhudragad Hanamante NA NA NA NA
146 Shahuwadi Golivane NA NA NA NA
147 Shahuwadi Wadi Kalkavane NA NA NA NA
148 Dodamarg Sargave 28 93 NA NA
149 Dodamarg Aynode 130 631 NA NA
150 Dodamarg Kendre Kh. 7 37 NA NA
151 Dodamarg Pal 41 184 NA NA
152 Dodamarg Kendre Bk. 13 55 NA NA

SAHYADRI-RADHANAGARI -GOA CORRIDOR 161

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.53:
Potential bottlenecks ,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Sahyadri-
Radhanagri-Goa

162 CENTRAL INDIAN LANDSCAPE AND EASTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 2.54:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Sahyadri-
Radhanagri-Goa
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

SAHYADRI-RADHANAGARI -GOA CORRIDOR 163

WESTERN GHATS
3
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

WESTERN GHATS LANDSCAPE

From an ecological perspective, this region with a total forested area of Maharashtra. The populations in Goa and Maharashtra depend
1,01,467 km2 (Qureshi et al. 2006) comprising of nine notified Tiger significantly on the narrow forest connectivity of the Western Ghat
Reserves, three proposed Tiger Reserve, viz., Sathyamangalam Tiger ridge.
Reserve in Tamil Nadu and Kudremukh and Biligiri Rangaswamy The Western Ghat tiger populations are more connected with each
Temple Hills (BRT) Wildlife Sanctuary in Karnataka; 20 National Parks other when compared to tiger populations in Central India and the
and about 68 Wildlife Sanctuaries forms one of the largest Protected Shivalik-Gangetic Plains landscapes. The habitat matrix in the Western
Area networks in India. The Nilgiri and Agasthiya-Malai Biosphere Ghats is more conducive for tiger occupancy. However, the habitat
Reserves are also located within this zone in addition to several connectivity is threatened by plantations, agriculture, industrial and
Reserved Forests and sacred groves, totalling to about 5.8% of the total infrastructural development. It would be prudent to timely identify and
forested area in the Western Ghats alone. This landscape has the legitimize the minimal corridors needed for the conservation objective
potential to have contiguous tiger occupancy from the Dang forests in of ensuring gene flow between the Western Ghats tiger populations in
Gujarat up to the Palakkad Gap in Kerala and then again from times to come. The major impediments to tiger conservation in this
Parambikulum-Indira Gandhi complex upto Kalakad-Mundanthurai zone are the existence of hydro-electric projects, hunting (Madhusudan
Tiger Reserve. Within this landscape the most important source and Karanth 2002) and deforestation of large areas for commercial
population is the Nagarahole-Mudumalai-Wayanad population which plantations.
spans the three States of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala with a
2 The Least Cost Path analysis provides the optimal corridor between
high density (average density of over 4 tigers per 100 km ) tiger
2 Protected Areas. The minimal corridors defined here need to be
population occupying a large area (over 9000 km ). The other sources
safeguarded through policy and formal legislation. A designation of
though occupying sufficiently large patches of habitat are of low tiger
"ecosensitive areas" to these minimal habitat corridors would ensure
density (1-2 tigers per 100 km2) and their nuclei are centred within
that land uses within these corridors are not altered to such drastic
Protected Area complexes. These source populations are Kalakad-
levels that the corridors become non-functional and lose their
Mundanthurai, Periyar and the Parambikulum-Indira Gandhi complex
conservation significance. These corridors have been designed based
south of the Palakkad Gap, while Kudremukh, Bhadra, Anshi and
on the habitat potential for supporting tigers (occupancy probability),
Dandeli are north of the Palakkad Gap. A few tigers are also recorded
however, they would also fulfill the needs of many other wildlife
from the forests in Goa and from the Sayahadri Tiger Reserve in
species.

166 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.1:
Habitat Connectivity in
Western Ghats
Landscape

WESTERN GHATS LANDSCAPE 167

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.2:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Western Ghats as
depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

168 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

ANSHI-DANDELI-SHARAVATHI VALLEY

This complex consists of the protected areas of Mollam-Netravali, Anshi and Dandeli are connected through contiguous forests, the least
Anshi-Dandeli, Sharavathi Valley-Mookambika along with Reserved cost pathways (north of Ulavi settlement), formalizing this connectivity
Forests of Haliyal and Yellapur. To the north, this complex is connected would secure these forests for the future. The corridor connectivity
to the forests of Goa which continue to the Sahayadri Tiger Reserve in between Anshi-Dandeli and Sharavathi Valley is long and traverses
Maharashtra with sporadic records of tiger occupancy. While the forest through plantation and agriculture mosaics. However, the least cost
connectivity between this complex and the southern Kudremukh- pathway and Circuitscape flows minimizes passage through private
Bhadra complex is weak, interspersed by plantation and agricultural lands and suggests the ideal corridor to connect the two major tiger
mosaics, evidence exists through camera trapped pictures to confirm landscapes of Karnataka. Two corridors, one from Anshi and another
movement of tigers between the two areas (Ullas Karanth, Pers. Com.). from Dandeli emerge from either side of the Kodasalli Reservoir and
Tiger population in 2010 within this region was estimated to be meet north of the Benne Hole falls. The bottlenecks for this corridor
between 36 and 42 tigers with occupancy in an area of 4,756 km2, were at Jog Falls where a narrow strip of forest (1.5 km) remains as a
indicating a decline in tiger occupied area since 2006. This decline was connectivity. This connectivity, if formally recognized and restored
observed in the forests connecting Anshi-Dandeli to forests of Goa in would promote gene flow across major populations of the Western
the north and to forests of Sharavathi Valley in the south. Ghats from Pune to Palakkad.

Anshi-Dandeli-Sharavathi Valley Corridor

Habitat size 40589 Sq. Km2
Source Population Anshi NP
Dandeli WLS
2
Size of Source 39 (36-42) tigers in 4756 Km
Protected Areas Anshi NP
Dandeli WLS
Sharavathi WLS
Corridors Dandeli-Sharavathi WLS
Anshi-Sharavathi WLS
Dandeli-Anshi WLS

ANSHI-DANDELI-SHARAVATHI VALLEY 169

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.3:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Anshi-Dandeli-
Sharavathi Valley as
depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

170 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.4:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Anshi-Dandeli-
Sharavathi Valley
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 3.1)

ANSHI-DANDELI-SHARAVATHI VALLEY 171

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Karnataka Karwar Yellapur Joglepal 10 49 9 42
2 Yellapur Bare 166 852 204 877
3 Yellapur Kattige 82 415 419 1898
4 Yellapur Targar 30 165 37 171
5 Yellapur Vajralli 134 630 133 552
6 Yellapur Kodlagadde 57 322 245 943
7 Yellapur Mavinamane 342 1746 397 1748
8 Yellapur Gullapur 175 773 226 893
9 Yellapur Bare 166 852 204 877
10 Yellapur Kodlagadde 57 322 245 943
11 Yellapur Bigar 42 231 43 192
12 Yellapur Geral 91 422 81 398
13 Yellapur Balagara 134 759 143 627
14 Yellapur Barballi 36 127 Na Na
15 Yellapur Kalche 268 1208 298 1075
16 Yellapur Baginakatte 37 156 32 124
17 Yellapur Hongadde 57 245 56 222
18 Ankola Shevkar 63 420 73 448
19 Ankola Sunkasal 208 966 229 930
20 Ankola Kodlagadde 211 937 245 943
21 Ankola Halvalli 307 1361 345 1461
22 Ankola Dongri 127 635 145 660
23 Ankola Kammani 38 168 54 217
24 Ankola Hebbul 97 503 119 533
25 Ankola Kuntgani 186 933 247 1030 Table 3.1
26 Ankola Hillur 512 2366 620 2499 Villages within the Least
27 Ankola Manigadde 23 140 30 137 Cost Pathway Corridor
between Anshi-
28 Ankola Achave 406 1853 490 1969
Dandeli-Sharavathi
29 Ankola Kalleshvar NA NA NA NA Valley as shown in
30 Honavar Hulegar 284 1126 190 629 Fig. 3.4

172 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_id State District Tehsil Village No Of Total No Of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
31 Honavar Jan NA NA NA NA
32 Honavar Kabbinahakkal NA NA NA NA
33 Honavar Heggargadde NA NA NA NA
34 Honavar Hirebail 200 937 268 1062
35 Honavar Hosgod 40 229 52 264
36 Honavar Mahime 505 2308 594 2685
37 Honavar Hadgeri 79 348 93 389
38 Honavar Shirkur 74 336 84 378
39 Honavar Nagarbastikere 712 3476 787 3617
40 Honavar Kandoddi 54 282 69 359
41 Joida Hebbal 19 106 755 3833
42 Joida Bidoli 57 264 71 296
43 Joida Amboli 171 916 190 956
44 Joida Yarmukh 98 432 99 413
45 Joida Chaper 16 67 20 86
46 Joida Bhedasgadde NA NA NA NA
47 Joida Kodagihittal NA NA NA NA
48 Joida Shivapura 46 200 9 33
49 Joida Tulasageri 4 14 3 9
50 Joida Ulvi 135 735 178 767
51 Joida Netragi Na Na Na Na
52 Joida Kodatalli Na Na Na Na
53 Joida Birkoi 121 381 63 244
54 Joida Sulageri NA NA NA NA
55 Karwar Devkar 120 409 91 397
56 Kumta Medini 47 254 64 268
57 Kumta Morse 35 140 41 165
58 Kumta Bangane 75 409 109 474
59 Kumta Yan 94 427 125 495
60 Kumta Negalagone NA NA NA NA

ANSHI-DANDELI-SHARAVATHI VALLEY 173

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
61 Shimoga Sagar Uralagallu 36 150 41 133
62 Karwar Siddapur Hallibail 71 389 79 354
63 Siddapur Nilkund 43 201 63 247
64 Siddapur Bilegod 75 440 89 423
65 Siddapur Kodigadde 60 301 83 372
66 Siddapur Hukkali 31 173 49 201
67 Siddapur Gijagini 51 303 67 324
68 Siddapur Niragod 7 26 10 37
69 Sirsi Kelaginkeri 68 377 84 385
70 Sirsi Mundaganamane 122 555 128 588
71 Sirsi Hosur 26 112 29255 116821
72 Sirsi Harsimane 50 227 54 223
73 Sirsi Bengaon 137 641 170 695
74 Sirsi Hebre 207 957 229 947
75 Sirsi Bugadi 5 14 5 27
76 Joida Gund 67 321 64 300
77 Joida Bidoli 57 264 71 296
78 Joida Shidoli Na Na Na Na
79 Joida Amboli 171 916 190 956
80 Joida Ambarade NA NA NA NA

174 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.5:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Anshi-
Dandeli-Sharavathi
Valley

ANSHI-DANDELI-SHARAVATHI VALLEY 175

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.6:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Anshi-
Dandeli-Sharavathi
Valley landscape in the
year 1992 and 2012

176 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA

This complex comprises of the central part of the Western Ghats in

Karnataka and includes Kudremukh National Park and Bhadra Tiger
Reserve. Kudremukh National Park is a proposed Tiger Reserve site and
occupies parts of Karkala taluka in Udupi, Belthangadi taluka in
Dakshin Kannada and Mudigere, Sringeri and Koppa taluka in
Chikmagalur district. Immediately north of Kudremukh is Someshwara
Wildlife Sanctuary while Shettihalli Wildlife Sanctuary is located north
of Bhadra Tiger Reserve. While this region has relatively low
abundance of tigers, the area holds good potential for tiger persistence.
The tiger population in 2010 within this complex was estimated to be
between 38 and 42 tigers with occupancy in an area of 4,258 km2. The
area occupied by tigers and the estimated tiger population within this
landscape showed a decline in 2010 compared to 2006. The loss in tiger Kudremukh-Pushpagiri Corridor
occupancy was observed in the forests south of Bhadra (Chikmagalur 2
Habitat size 40589 Km
taluka), and south-west of Kudremukh (Belthangadi taluka). To the
Source Population Kudremukh-Bhadra
south of this tiger complex is the Nagarahole-Mudumalai-Wayanad
2
complex, with small Protected Areas in-between such as Pushpagiri Size of Source 40 (38-42) tigers in 4258 Km
Wildlife Sanctuary and Talakaveri Wildlife Sanctuary connected with Protected Areas Kudremukh WLS
Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary by Padinalknad and Kerti Reserved Pushpagiri WLS
Forests. The intervening habitat matrix between the Protected Area
Corridors Kudremukh NP-Pushpagiri WLS
complexes consist of plantations, agriculture and some scattered
habitation along with other Reserved Forests such as Kabbinale,
Kagneri and Kiribag. The corridor linkages identified within this
landscape and between this landscape and tiger landscapes to the
north and south by least cost pathways and Circuitscape flows are
essential elements to ensure long term tiger persistence. Connectivity Someshwara WLS-Kudremukh NP-Bhadra WLS Corridor
between the Protected Areas within the Kudremukh-Bhadra complex Habitat size 40589 Km2
was patchy. Source Population Kudremukh-Bhadra
2
Size of Source 40 (38-42) in 4258 Km
Protected Areas Kudremukh NP
Someshwara WLS
Bhadra WLS
Corridors Kudremukh NP-Someshwara WLS
Kudremukh NP-Bhadra WLS

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 177
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.7:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Kudremukh-Pushpagiri
Corridor as depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

178 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.8:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Kudremukh-Pushpagiri
overlaid with village
map ( the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 3.2)

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 179
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Karnataka Mangalore Belthangadi Charmadi 818 4668 977 5169
2 Belthangadi Kadirudyavara 626 3360 737 3421
3 Belthangadi Neriya 1213 6191 1394 6802
4 Belthangadi Chibidre 360 2212 462 2372
5 Belthangadi Mundaje 770 3804 903 4259
6 Belthangadi Kalanja 907 4515 1057 4988
7 Belthangadi Nidle 579 2905 667 3025
8 Belthangadi Hathyadka 590 2835 629 2789
9 Belthangadi Mittabagilu 613 3341 773 4002
10 Belthangadi Totatadi 634 3222 750 3591
11 Belthangadi Kalmanja 589 3192 771 3709
12 Belthangadi Puduvetta 612 3060 731 3343
13 Belthangadi Dharmastala 1868 9258 2181 9818
14 Belthangadi Shisla 434 2070 471 2090
15 Belthangadi Shibaje Male Na Na Na Na
16 Belthangadi Rekya 450 2092 500 2079
17 Puttur Kombar 525 2586 592 2684
18 Puttur Koukradi 815 4281 1039 4916
19 Puttur Shiradi 672 3164 746 2933
20 Puttur Nujibaltila 682 3320 759 3278
21 Puttur Kenje Na Na Na Na
22 Puttur Shirivagilu 143 714 153 667
23 Puttur Bilenele 740 3501 819 3580
Table 3.2:
24 Hassan Sakaleshpur Na Na Na 82 335 Villages within the Least
25 Sakaleshpur Kumarhalli Na Na Na Na Cost Pathway Corridor
between Kudremukh-
26 Sakaleshpur Bislestateforest Na Na Na Na
Pushpagiri Valley as
27 Mangalore Sulya Subrahmanya 810 3447 1012 4443 shown in Fig. 3.8

180 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.9:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Kudremukh-Pushpagiri

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 181
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.10:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kudremukh-
Pushpagiri Corridor
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

182 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.11:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Someshwara WLS-
Kudremukh NP-Bhadra
WLS Corridor as
depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 183
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.12:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Someshwara WLS-
Kudremukh NP-Bhadra
WLS overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 3.3)

184 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Karnataka Chikmagalur Chikmagalur Bidare 606 2727 557 2250
2 Chikmagalur Shirgota 166 705 140 504
3 Koppa Hiregadde 352 1551 24 101
4 Koppa Kulur 402 1884 455 1874
5 Koppa Yelemadalu 473 2094 527 2117
6 Koppa Megur 106 568 104 527
7 Koppa Jayapur 874 3696 917 3454
8 Koppa Adigebail 560 2362 509 1943
9 Koppa Agalagundi 247 1137 234 918
10 Koppa Hulagaradi 121 562 111 486
11 Koppa Heggar 172 784 150 641
12 Koppa Bachal Kan Na Na Na Na
13 Koppa Guddetota 264 1137 262 1053
14 Koppa Honnugundi 289 1333 288 1350
15 Koppa Bhairadevar 421 1809 439 1617
16 Koppa Na Na Na 82 335
17 Koppa Harlane 142 706 139 573
18 Koppa Kallugudda 224 1088 249 1001
19 N.r.pura Kolhalli Na Na 151 681
20 N.r.pura Maduguni Na Na Na Na
21 N.r.pura Megaramakki 155 690 187 710
Table 3.3:
22 Sringeri Malnadu 130 731 157 742
Villages within the Least
Cost Pathway Corridor 23 Udupi Karkal Nadpal 509 2578 563 2478
between Someshwara 24 Chikmagalur Sringeri Rushyashringapura 365 1588 394 1501
WLS-Kudremukh NP-
Bhadra WLS as shown 25 Sringeri Yedahalli 240 1162 80 407
in Fig. 3.12 26 Shimoga Thirthahalli Agumbe NA NA NA NA

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 185
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.13:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Someshwara WLS-
Kudremukh NP-Bhadra
WLS

186 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.14:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Someshwara
WLS-Kudremukh NP-
Bhadra WLS Corridor
landscape in the year
1992

Someshwara-Mookambika-Shettihalli WLS corridor

Habitat size 40589 Sq. Km
Source Population Anshi NP
Dandeli WLS Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary is connected to Someshwara Wildlife
Size of Source 39 (36-42) tigers in 4756 Sq. Km Sanctuary in the south through Reserved Forests of Hulikal, Varahi and
Protected Areas Someshwara WLS Tombattu; which is further connected to Kudremukh National Park
Mookambika WLS
through contiguous forest. On the east, Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary
is poorly connected to Shettihali Wildlife Sanctuary through narrow
Shettihali WLS
ridge-top forests, the last part (8-10 km) of which traverses habitation
Corridors Someshwara WLS-Mookambika WLS and agriculture, with small patches of forests providing "stepping
Mookambika WLS-Shettihali WLS stone" connectivity.

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 187
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.15:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Someshwara-
Mookambika-Shettihalli
WLS corridor as
depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

188 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.16:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Someshwara-
Mookambika-Shettihalli
WLS overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 3.4)

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 189
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Karnataka Shimoga Hosanagara Balekoppa 26 200 43 207
2 Hosanagara Kodase 52 260 66 255
3 Hosanagara Billodi 89 384 96 438
4 Hosanagara Malali 55 288 59 353
5 Hosanagara Malalikoppa 83 436 96 446
6 Hosanagara Gorgodu 161 858 204 954
7 Hosanagara Aramanekoppa 218 1023 234 958
8 Hosanagara Haniya 76 370 80 320
9 Hosanagara Nellunde 40 199 50 197
10 Hosanagara Sonale 229 1154 248 1134
11 Hosanagara Nidagodu 154 692 266 1043
12 Hosanagara Mattikai 166 753 193 766
13 Hosanagara Brahmanataruve 85 384 102 369
14 Hosanagara Kukkodagasaramane 112 488 140 501
15 Hosanagara Ramachandrapur 117 617 38 121
16 Hosanagara Honnebailu 211 1034 228 883
17 Hosanagara Trineve 188 924 202 916
18 Hosanagara Brahmanvad 95 443 114 494
19 Hosanagara Togare 142 705 152 637
20 Hosanagara Basavanbyana 49 245 55 262
21 Hosanagara Baise 183 886 208 961
22 Hosanagara Kalluvidiabbigalla 97 462 114 417
23 Hosanagara Kairakunda 732 3001 475 1704
24 Udupi Kundapura Muduru 660 3033 694 2973
25 Kundapura Halihole 443 2460 495 2328 Table 3.4:

26 Kundapura Bellal 499 2728 552 2780 Villages within the Least
Cost Pathway Corridor
27 Kundapura Hosangadi 1040 4972 1131 4872 between Someshwara-
28 Kundapura Machattu 456 2722 532 2616 Mookambika-Shettihalli
WLS as shown in
29 Kundapura Shedimane 413 2023 492 2370
Fig. 3.16
30 Kundapura Yedamoge NA NA NA NA

190 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
31 Kundapura Amasebail 524 2654 614 3034
32 Kundapura Samshe NA NA NA NA
33 Shimoga Thirthahalli Vatigar 55 263 60 255
34 Thirthahalli Hire Kallahalli 29 163 33 142
35 Thirthahalli Torebail 87 411 108 459
36 Thirthahalli Chik Kallahalli 54 348 73 315
37 Thirthahalli Alur 99 499 3 13
38 Thirthahalli Kesare 123 497 109 417
39 Thirthahalli Umblebailu 8 37 9 38
40 Thirthahalli Muniyur 277 1273 308 1414
41 Thirthahalli Shankarapura 245 1168 19 72
42 Thirthahalli Mandaka 18 62 18 62
43 Thirthahalli Shankarahalli 36 207 41 209
44 Thirthahalli Hosakoppa 39 210 14 66
45 Thirthahalli Karekoppa 6 25 221 947
46 Thirthahalli Hadigallu 179 839 271 1078
47 Thirthahalli Halavanahalli 60 274 63 237
48 Thirthahalli Balagodu 26 100 32 108
49 Thirthahalli Aralasurali 109 508 130 460
50 Thirthahalli Bidi 15 78 1025 4445
51 Thirthahalli Melina Kadkod 36 181 41 178
52 Thirthahalli Demalapura 158 688 188 767
53 Thirthahalli Malleswara 188 935 351 1498
54 Thirthahalli Kardiga 135 670 178 727
55 Thirthahalli Konanduru 883 4009 996 3973
56 Thirthahalli Siragaru 274 1217 296 1210

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 191
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.17:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Someshwara-
Mookambika-Shettihalli
WLS

192 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.18:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the
Someshwara-
Mookambika-Shettihalli
WLS Corridor
landscape in the year
1992

The Reserved Forests of Northern Cardamom Hills, Choranayedahalli, Kakanhosudi and Tamadihalli connect Shettihalli Wildlife Sanctuary to the
northern parts of Bhadra Tiger Reserve. While this habitat matrix is permeable for wildlife movement, it is dotted with few agricultural developments
which could grow into barriers at a later date. Connectivity to the southern portion of Bhadra with Shetthalli was only through ridge top forests and at
risk of being broken at some places by agriculture development. Habitat matrix intervening Bhadra Tiger Reserve and Kudremukn National Park was
conducive for movement of tigers and their prey, but designating a formal corridor within this matrix would ensure this connectivity for the future.

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 193
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Bhadra-Shettihalli WLS Corridor

2
Habitat size 40589 Km
Source Population Kudremukh-Bhadra
Size of Source 40 (38-42) tigers in 4258 Km2
Protected Areas Bhadra WLS
Shettihali WLS
Corridors Shettihali WLS-Bhadra WLS 1
Shettihali WLS-Bhadra WLS 2

Figure 3.19:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Bhadra-Shettihalli WLS
Corridor as depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

194 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.20:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Bhadra-Shettihalli WLS
overlaid with village
map ( the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 3.5)

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 195
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Karnataka Chikmagalur N.R.Pura Kanaburu NA NA NA NA
2 Shimoga Shimoga Lingapura 2 8 174 895
3 Shimoga Sakrebailu 6 32 11 49
4 Shimoga Kaitotlu 64 316 55 241
5 Shimoga Sarigere 29 139 30 123
6 Shimoga Chitemane NA NA NA NA
7 Shimoga Naldlle NA NA NA NA
8 Shimoga Biligalu 340 1681 190 852
9 Shimoga Siddammaji Hosuru 40 160 40 162
10 Shimoga Bairapura Na Na 47 196
11 Shimoga Kakanhosudi 95 440 105 392
12 Thirthahalli Talale 57 262 201 929
13 Thirthahalli Bommanahalli 5 21 253 1372
14 Thirthahalli Kigadi 86 357 84 312
15 Chikmagalur Chikmagalur Shirgota 166 705 140 504
16 Koppa Nuggi 444 1980 449 1693
17 Koppa Talamakki 332 1609 442 1703
18 Koppa Bintaravalli 477 2256 721 3029
19 N.R.Pura Adavalli Na Na 75 314
20 Narasimharajapura Konakere 103 558 127 502
21 Narasimharajapura Bellur 87 372 151 615
22 Narasimharajapura Konodi 161 742 176 679
23 Narasimharajapura Sankse 205 892 211 855
24 Narasimharajapura Haravari 371 1588 413 1590
25 Narasimharajapura Alehalli 156 618 149 536
26 Narasimharajapura Davana 119 552 140 512 Table 3.5:

27 N.R.Pura Muttinakoppa NA NA NA NA Villages within the Least

Cost Pathway Corridor
28 N.R.Pura Madaburu NA NA NA NA between Bhadra-
29 N.R.Pura Malandur NA NA NA NA Shettihalli WLS as
shown in Fig. 3.20
30 N.R.pura Kadabinabail NA NA NA NA

196 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
31 N.R.Pura Neralakoppa NA NA 8 41
32 N.R.Pura Hatur NA NA NA NA
33 N.R.Pura Badagabail NA NA NA NA
34 N.R.Pura Simmase NA NA NA NA
35 N.R.Pura Gubbaga NA NA NA NA
36 N.R.Pura Kamalapur NA NA NA NA
37 N.R.Pura Sedgaru NA NA 65 274
38 N.R.Pura Situr NA NA NA NA
39 N.R.Pura Kanuru NA NA 250 1048
40 N.R.Pura Karkeshvar NA NA NA NA
41 Shimoga Thirthahalli Hemmakki 87 403 407 1707
42 Shimoga Thirthahalli Lingapur 437 2028 191 1002

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 197
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3 21:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Bhadra-
Shettihalli WLS

198 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.22:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Bhadra-
Shettihalli WLS
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 199
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

The connectivity to the south from Kudremukh National Park to

Pushpagiri Wildlife Sanctuary, and then directly onto Nagarahole
National Park and to Wayanad Tiger Reserve (Kerala) via Talakaveri
Wildlife Sanctuary and Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary is one of the most
precarious corridor systems within the Western Ghats. The connectivity
of Kudremukh-Bhadra complex to the Nagarahole-Bandipur-
Mudumalai-Wayanad complex via the western corridor system
(Pushpagiri-Talakaveri-Brahmagiri) as well as the direct connectivity to
Nagarahole showed tiger presence suggestive of viable corridors
systems. The western corridor is along the steep western slopes of the
Ghats and therefore not an easy passage for species like elephants,
while the eastern corridor is along moderate gradients but traverses
more human impacted habitats. There are two bottlenecks on the Nagarahole-Pushpagiri-Talakavery Corridor
eastern corridor; one along the banks of the Cauvery where agricultural Habitat size 40589 Km2
development disrupts forest contiguity and another is near Nagarahole, Source Population Bandipur-Nagarahole-Mudumalai-Wayanad
where the corridor passes through an agriculture-forest matrix for the 2
Size of Source 382 (354-411) tigers in 11100 Km
last 8-10 kilometres. Movement of tigers from the Nagarahole-
Mudumalai-Wayanad landscape to Kudremukh-Bhadra complex is Protected Areas Nagarahole WLS
likely to be an important component for tiger population dynamics in Pushpagiri WLS
this low density landscape. Formal recognition and protection of these Talacauvery WLS
least cost pathways as corridors would help ensure long term tiger Corridors Nagarahole WLS-Pushpagiri WLS
persistence within this landscape system. Pushpagiri WLS-Talacauvery WLS
Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary shares its north-eastern border with
Karnataka and is contiguous with parts of Bandipur and Nagarahole in
Karnataka and Mudumalai in Tamil Nadu. The Tholpetty Range of
Wayanad in Manantoddy taluka is contiguous with Nagarahole while Wayanad-Brahmagiri-Talakaveri WLS
Kurichiat, Sultan's Battery and Muthanga Ranges are contiguous with Habitat size 40589 Km
2

Bandipur and Mudumalai Tiger Reserve. This landscape (Nagarahole-

Source Population Bandipur-Nagarahole-Mudumalai-Wayanad
Wayanad-Mudumalai) hosts the largest contiguous population of tigers
and elephants. Wayanad is connected to the Silent Valley National Park Size of Source 382 (354-411) tigers in 11100 Km2
in Kerala through Mudumalai and Mukurti in Tamil Nadu. Protected Areas Wayanad WLS
Brahmagiri WLS
Talacauvery WLS
Corridors Wayanad WLS-Brahmagiri WLS
Brahmagiri WLS-Talacauvery WLS

200 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.23
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Nagarahole-Pushpagiri-
Talakavery-Brahmagiri
Corridor as depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 201
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.24:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Nagarahole-Pushpagiri-
Talakaveri

202 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.25:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Wayanad-Brahmagiri-
Talakaveri WLS

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 203
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.26:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Nagarahole-Pushpagiri-
Talakavery-Brahmagiri

204 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.27:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Nagarahole-
Pushpagiri-Talakavery-
Brahmagiri landscape
in the year 1992 and
2012

KUDREMUKH-BHADRA 205
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

NAGARAHOLE-BANDIPUR-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD

This landscape has the highest tiger population in India within a

network of Protected Areas. This landscape encompasses Wayanad in
Kerala, Nagarahole-Bandipur in Karnataka along the northern border
with Mudumalai in Tamil Nadu and BRT and Cauvery Wildlife
Sanctuary along Karnataka-Tamil Nadu border. This contiguous tiger
population stretches across three states, viz., Karnataka (Nagarahole-
Bandipur), Tamil Nadu (Mudumalai-Segur plateau-Moyar gorge-
Sathyamangalam) and Kerala (Wayanad). In 2010-11, tigers were also Bandipur-Cauveri Corridor
camera-trapped in the Segur plateau-Moyar gorge-Sathyamangalam 2
Habitat size 40589 Km
region in Tamil Nadu, providing evidence of resident tiger population
as well as possible movement of individuals between this region and Source Population Bandipur-Nagarahole-Mudumalai-Wayanad
BRT Wildlife Sanctuary and onwards to Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary. Size of Source 382 (354-411) tigers in 11100 Km2
Connectivity between Bandipur, BRT and on to Cauvery Wildlife Protected Areas Bandipur NP
Sanctuary through the Moyar-Segur-Sathyamangalam forests (Tamil Biligiri Ranganathaswamy WLS
Nadu) shown by the Least Cost Pathways needs to be ensured through Cauvery WLS
inter- state cooperation between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Corridors Bandipur NP-Biligiri Rangaswamy WLS
Connectivity from BRT to Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary, though intact, is Corridor
threatened by growing settlements and agriculture, while connectivity Bandipur NP-Cauvery WLS Corridor
from Cauvery to Bannerghatta Wildlife Sanctuary is through narrow
forest strips and "stepping stone" forest patches, in a human-dominated
landscape.

Cauveri-Bannerghata Corridor
2
Habitat size 40774 Km
Source Population Bandipur-Nagarahole-Mudumalai-Wayanad
2
Size of Source 382 (354-411) tigers in 11100 Km
Protected Areas Cauvery WLS
Banerghatta WLS
Corridors Cauvery WLS-Banerghatta WLS Corridor

206 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.28:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Bandipur-Cauveri
Corridor as depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

NAGARAHOLE-BANDIPUR-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD 207
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.29:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Bandipur-Cauveri WLS
overlaid with village
map ( the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 3.6)

208 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Tamil Nadu Erode Sathyamangalam Thingalur A/b NA NA NA NA
2 Sathyamangalam Koothampalayam 355 1457 454 1918
3 Sathyamangalam Hassanur 953 3690 1258 4454
4 Sathyamangalam Guthiyalathur 3667 14213 4761 17257
5 Sathyamangalam Talamalai 919 3659 1295 4828
6 Sathyamangalam Guthiyalathur (addition) NA NA NA NA
8 Bhavani Burgur 3651 15874 4128 17529
9 Bhavani Burgur 3651 15874 4128 17529
Table 3.6: 10 The Nilgiris Udhagamandalam Kadanad 1788 7157 3461 14692
Villages within the Least 11 Kotagiri Nilgiri Eastern Slopes 476 1369 NA NA
Cost Pathway Corridor
between Bandipur- 12 Karnataka Chamaraja Kollegal NA NA NA 82 335
Cauveri WLS as shown Nagar
in Fig. 3.29 13 Kollegal Huggiyam NA NA NA NA

NAGARAHOLE-BANDIPUR-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD 209
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.30:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Bandipur-
Cauveri

210 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.31:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Bandipur-
Cauveri landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

NAGARAHOLE-BANDIPUR-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD 211
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.32:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Cauveri-Bannerghata
Corridor as depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

212 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.33:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Cauveri-Bannerghata
WLS overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 3.7)

NAGARAHOLE-BANDIPUR-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD 213
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Tamil Nadu Dharmapuri Denkanikottai Achubalu 567 2581 762 3435
2 Denkanikottai Gumlapuram 521 2667 723 3331
3 Denkanikottai Chudasandiram 306 1628 393 1727
4 Denkanikottai Nendimangalam 68 363 105 578
5 Denkanikottai Madakkal 986 5228 1175 5383
6 Denkanikottai Thaggatti 944 4429 1116 5153
7 Denkanikottai Natrapalayam . 1564 7029 2258 9687
8 Denkanikottai Agalakotta A/b NA NA NA NA
9 Karnataka Bangalore Anekal Tammanayakanahalli 432 2271 549 2527
Urban
10 Bangalore Kanakapura Linganapura 137 662 205 793
Rural
11 Kanakapura Bantanalu 4 17 23 85
12 Kanakapura Bijjahalli 276 1124 294 1130
13 Kanakapura Kengalanatta Gollahalli 102 449 112 471
14 Kanakapura Kattarinatta 36 182 43 138
15 Kanakapura Elachavadi NA NA NA Na
16 Kanakapura Bhimasandra 59 257 104 441
17 Kanakapura Terubidi 335 1518 374 1601
18 Kanakapura Gatgunda 719 3631 692 2816
Table 3.7:
19 Kanakapura Kolagaudahalli 706 3502 712 3257 Villages within the Least
20 Kanakapura Manjilnatha NA NA NA NA Cost Pathway Corridor
between Cauveri-
21 Chamaraja Kollegal NA NA NA 82 335
Bannerghata WLS as
Nagar
shown in Fig. 3.33

214 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.34:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Cauveri-
Bannerghata

NAGARAHOLE-BANDIPUR-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD 215
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.35:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Cauveri-
Bannerghata
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

216 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

NAGARAHOLE-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD

The Mudumalai landscape is connected through the forested slopes of Within the southern buffer of Mudumalai and its surroundings, the
the Nilgiris to the Mukurthi National Park in the south which is further habitat is fragmented by large and small settlements like Masinagudi
connected to Silent Valley. Due to the rugged and steep nature of this and Moyar colony. Many of these private lands are being developed
connectivity, elephants are unlikely to use it, but it would serve as a into tourist resorts with elephant proof power fencing. Linear
viable corridor for tigers and other fauna. Towards the east, infrastructure like the power channel from Masinagudi to Moyar and
Sathyamangalam Wildlife Sanctuary connects with the corridor formed the water pipeline from Glenmorgan to Singara further prevent free
by the Moyar River valley connecting the Bandipur-Mudumalai movement of species like elephants across these forests. Restrictions
complex with BRT Wildlife Sanctuary and on to Cauvery Wildlife on unfriendly developments and mitigation of existing linear
Sanctuary. infrastructure are needed for full utilization of this landscape by
wildlife. Addressing the above issues and legitimizing the two corridors
defined by the Least Cost Pathways would enhance the conservation
potential of this important reserve complex further.
Figure 3.36:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Mudumalai-Mukurthi-
Silent Valley Corridor as
depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

Mudumalai-Mukurthi-Silent Valley Corridor

2
Habitat size 40589 Km
Source Population Bandipur-Nagarahole-Mudumalai-Wayanad
Size of Source 382 (354-411) tigers in 11100 Km2
Protected Areas Mudumalai NP
Mukurthi NP
Silent Valley NP
Corridors Mudumalai NP-Mukurthi NP
Mudumalai NP-Silent Valley NP
Mukurthi NP-Silent Valley NP

NAGARAHOLE-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD 217
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.37:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Mudumalai-Mukurthi-
Silent Valley overlaid
with village map (the
village numbers are
referenced in Table 3.8)

218 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Tamil Nadu The Nilgiris Udhagamandalam Nanjanad 3553 14310 3621 13007
2 Kundah Mulligoor 1491 5393 1363 4647
3 Gudalur Gudalur (tn-1) 9508 43096 12101 49535
4 Udhagamandalam Naduvattam 2572 11370 2340 8505
5 Gudalur Ovalley 5465 24793 5307 21943
6 Udhagamandalam Masinigudi NA NA NA NA
7 Kerala Palghat Mannarkkad Padavayal 1686 6764 1719 6144
8 Malappuram Ernad Amarambalam 6284 31928 7841 35975
Table 3.8: 9 Ernad Chekkode 3042 16850 3841 19510
Villages within the Least 10 Ernad Kalikavu 4504 25861 4435 22018
Cost Pathway Corridor
between Mudumalai- 11 Ernad Karulai 4685 24336 5537 25758
Mukurthi-Silent Valley 12 Ernad Kerala Estate 1818 10299 2893 14871
WLS as shown in
13 Ernad Vazhikkadavu 8308 44083 9972 47322
Fig. 3.37

NAGARAHOLE-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD 219
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.38:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Mudumalai-
Mukurthi-Silent Valley
WLS

220 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.39:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Mudumalai-
Mukurthi-Silent Valley
WLS landscape in the
year 1992 and 2012

NAGARAHOLE-MUDUMALAI-WAYANAD 221
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

PARAMBIKULAM-ERAVIKULAM-INDIRA GANDHI

This is the first major tiger population south of Figure 3.40:

the Palghat Gap, which is a major barrier to Potential habitat
geneflow from the northern Western Ghats to connectivity for tiger
the southern Western Ghats for most wildlife movement between
species including tigers, due to its high human Chimmony-
density. This tiger population is spread over Parambikulum Corridor
Parambikulam Tiger Reserve, Eravikulam as depicted by
National Park and Chinnar Wildlife Sanctuary in CIRCUITSCAPE model
Kerala; and Indira Gandhi (Annamalai) Tiger
Reserve in Tamil Nadu. The landscape has
shown good recovery due to good management
of the several reserves constituting the complex,
lower human pressures due to the difficult
terrain and contiguous nature of the tiger
habitat. Within Kerala, this zone comprises of
several Protected Areas which include Peechi-
Vazhani Wildlife Sanctuary, Chimmony Wildlife
Sanctuary, Eravikulum National Park, Chinnar
Wildlife Sanctuary and Parambikulam Tiger
Reserve. The tiger habitat in this zone is
contiguous with the Indira Gandhi (Annamalai)
Tiger Reserves in Tamil Nadu and with,
Anaimudi and Pambadum Shola National Park
which are located within Devikulam taluka of
Idukki district in Kerala. All of these Protected
Areas are connected through forested habitats
interspersed with plantations, agriculture, and
settlements, consisting of a habitat matrix that
is permeable for movement of wildlife. However,
two formal corridor systems are required: one
connecting Peechi-Chimmony to Parambikulam
and second, connecting Anaimudi Shola
National Parks to Pambadum Shola which
further extends into Mathikettan Shola National
Park. This connectivity extends further south

222 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.41: along the border of

Least Cost Pathway Kerala and Tamil Nadu
corridor for tiger as narrow ridge top
movement between forests of the Ghats,
Chimmony- through plantations and
Parambikulum WLS agriculture west of the
overlaid with village Ghat ridge, connecting
map (the village the population of this
numbers are landscape with that of
referenced in Table 3.9) Periyar-Kalakad-
Mundanthurai. This
connectivity is very
precarious and needs
ground verification as
the least cost pathways
traverse lot of privately
owned lands and
distinguishing between
plantations and forests
through remotely
sensed data was
difficult. Ground
verification is required
urgently and
conservation action is
needed to secure this
connectivity. Tiger
occupancy on the Kerala
side of this landscape
was 1,483 km2 with an
estimated population of
32 to 36 tigers. This area
showed a significant
increase in both, the
area occupied by tigers
since 2006 and their
abundance.

PARAMBIKULAM-ERAVIKULAM-INDIRA GANDHI 223

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Table 3.9.
Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total
_ID Household Population Household Population Villages within the
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011) Least Cost Pathway
Corridor between
1 KERALA THRISSUR Mukundapuram Pariyaram 7560 31615 8122 31195 Chimmony-
2 Thrissur Peechi 5083 22409 6706 26946 Parambikulum WLS as
shown in Fig. 3.41

Figure 3.42:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Chimmony-
Parambikulum WLS

Chimmony-Parambikulum Corridor
2
Habitat size 13233 Km
Source Population Parambikulum-Indira Gandhi
2
Size of Source 3a4 (32-36) tigers in 3253 Km
Protected Areas Chimmony WLS
Parambikulam WLS
Corridors Parambikulam WLS-Chimmony WLS Corridor

224 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.43:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Chimmony-
Parambikulum WLS
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

PARAMBIKULAM-ERAVIKULAM-INDIRA GANDHI 225

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.44:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Mathikettan-Periyar
Corridor as depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

226 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.45:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Mathikettan-Periyar
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in
Table 3.10)

PARAMBIKULAM-ERAVIKULAM-INDIRA GANDHI 227

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Tamil Nadu Theni Uthamapalayam Thevaram Hills NA NA NA NA
2 Bodinayakanur Bodi Hill West NA NA NA NA
0 Uthamapalayam Vannathiparai Rf 165 477 NA NA
3 Uthamapalayam Thevaram A/d 3549 14637 4225 16079
4 Uthamapalayam Pannaipuram A/c 1924 8347 2311 9323
5 Uthamapalayam Pudupatti 2537 10015 191 730
6 Uthamapalayam Gudalur (TN-2) 9308 35531 12001 41915
0 Uthamapalayam Kombai Rf NA NA NA NA
0 Uthamapalayam Suranganur Rf NA NA NA NA
0 Uthamapalayam Melagudalur Rf NA NA NA NA
7 Uthamapalayam T. Meenakshipuram A/b NA NA NA NA
8 Uthamapalayam Kobai East And West NA NA NA NA
9 Uthamapalayam Uthamapuram A/c NA NA NA NA
10 Kerala Idukki Udumbanchola Kumily 6666 28652 7404 30276
11 Udumbanchola Anakkara 5523 23934 5214 24699
12 Udumbanchola Chakkupallam 3039 12242 3429 12609
13 Udumbanchola Chathurangapara 1481 5325 1306 4177
Table 3.10:
14 Udumbanchola Karunapuram 7426 31981 7571 30473
Villages within the
15 Udumbanchola Parathodu 5316 21525 5444 20417 Least Cost Pathway
16 Udumbanchola Santhanpara 2211 8425 1985 6782 Corridor between
Mathikettan-Periyar as
17 Udumbanchola Poopara NA NA NA NA shown in Fig. 3.45

Mathikettan-Periyar Corridor
2
Habitat size 13233 Km
Source Population KMTR-Periyar
2
Size of Source 38 (36-40) tigers in 3812 Km
Protected Areas Mathikettan Shola NP
Periyar WLS
Corridors Periyar WLS-Mathikettan Shola NP Corridor

228 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.46:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting
Mathikettan-Periyar

PARAMBIKULAM-ERAVIKULAM-INDIRA GANDHI 229

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.47:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Mathikettan-
Periyar landscape in
the year 1992 and
2012

230 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.48:
Potential habitat
connectivity for tiger
movement between
Mathikettan Shola NP-
Pambadum Shola NP-
Anamudi Shola NP as
depicted by
CIRCUITSCAPE model

PARAMBIKULAM-ERAVIKULAM-INDIRA GANDHI 231

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.49:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Mathikettan Shola NP-
Pambadum Shola NP-
Anamudi Shola NP
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in
Table 3.11)

*Partial village
information for Kerala,
falling within the
corridor was
unavailable

232 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
Table 3.11: (2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
Villages within the Least
1 Tamil Nadu Dindigul Kodaikanal Mannavanur 1437 5927 2223 8117
Cost Pathway Corridor
between Mathikettan 2 Tamil Nadu Theni Bodinayakanur Kottagudi 557 1912 910 3272
Shola NP-Pambadum 3 Tamil Nadu Theni Bodinayakanur Bodi Hill West NA NA NA NA
Shola NP-Anamudi
Shola NP as shown in 4 Kerala Idukki Udumbanchola Chinnakanal 3095 12949 3210 12005
Fig. 3.49 5 Udumbanchola Poopara NA NA NA NA

Mathikettan Shola NP-Pambadum Shola NP-Anaimudi Shola NP Corridor

2
Habitat size 13233 Km
Source Population KMTR-Periyar
2
Size of Source 38 (36-40) tigers in 3812 Km
Protected Areas Mathiketan Shola NP
Pambadum Shola NP
Anamudi Shola NP
Corridors Mathikettan Shola NP-Pambadum Shola NP
Pambadum Shola NP-Anaimudi Shola NP

PARAMBIKULAM-ERAVIKULAM-INDIRA GANDHI 233

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.50:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Mathikettan
Shola NP-Pambadum
Shola NP-Anaimudi
Shola NP

234 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.51:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Mathikettan
Shola NP-Pambadum
Shola NP-Anaimudi
Shola NP landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

PARAMBIKULAM-ERAVIKULAM-INDIRA GANDHI 235

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

KALAKAD-MUNDANTHURAI-PERIYAR

This complex extends from Periyar Tiger Reserve in Kerala Figure 3.52:
and is contiguous with Peppara Wildlife Sanctuary in Potential habitat
Nedumangad taluka of Trivandrum and Neyyar Wildlife connectivity for tiger
Sanctuary in Neyyattinkara taluka of Trivandrum district. movement between
Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuary is located in Pathanapuram Periyar-Shendurney
district of Kollam. All three of these Protected Areas are WLS as depicted by
contiguous with Kanyakumari Wildlife Sanctuary and CIRCUITSCAPE model
Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve in Tamil Nadu. This
landscape has tiger occupancy in about 2,121 km2 with an
estimated tiger population between 36 and 40. The
connectivity between Periyar complex and the Protected
Areas to the south of Periyar are an essential element for long
term tiger persistence within this landscape complex. The
corridor identified by the Least Cost Pathway traverses hilly
forested terrain, interspersed by plantations and habitation. It
meets major barriers to wildlife movement near the township
of Aryankavu in the form of high human densities, road and
rail traffic. Mitigation measures need to be implemented here
to maintain the wildlife value of this corridor.

Periyar-Shendurney WLS Corridor

2
Habitat size 13233 Km
Source Population KMTR-Periyar
Size of Source 30 (36-40) tigers in 3812 Km2
Protected Areas Periyar WLS
Shendurney WLS
Corridors Periyar WLS-Shendurney WLS

236 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.53:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for tiger
movement between
Periyar-Shendurney
WLS overlaid with
village map ( the village
numbers are
referenced in
Table 3.12)

KALAKAD-MUNDANTHURAI-PERIYAR 237
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Tamil Nadu Tirunelveli Shenkottai Puliyarai A/b NA NA NA NA
2 Kerala Pattanamtitta Kozhanchery Aruvappulam 4039 16183 3872 13801 Table 3.12:
3 Quilon Pattanapuram Arienkavu 3162 12125 2910 10144 Villages within the Least
4 Pattanapuram Kulathupuzha 3519 14749 4145 15931 Cost Pathway Corridor
between Periyar-
5 Idukki Pirmed Mlappara 307 1125 314 1129 Shendurney WLS as
6 Pattanamtitta Rani Chittar-Seethathodu 8405 33977 8722 31969 shown in Fig. 3.53

Figure 3.54:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Periyar-
Shendurney WLS

238 WESTERN GHATS

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 3.55:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Periyar-
Shendurney WLS
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

KALAKAD-MUNDANTHURAI-PERIYAR 239
NORTH EAST
4
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

NORTH-EAST LANDSCAPE

The tiger populations in this landscape have historical evolutionary Most of this region today, is under intense tea cultivation with small
significance as they share the connecting gene pool with south east isolated remnants of forests. The discovery of good tea growing areas in
Asian tiger populations and represent the entry point of tigers into the Assam made this region amongst the first to undergo extensive land-
Indian sub-continent. This region has two important Tiger use changes with large areas being cleared out for tea cultivation on
Conservation Units (TCUs), one comprising of the Manas Tiger the banks of the Brahmaputra. Characterised by many islands and
Reserve, stretching across Bhutan to Arunachal Pradesh in the north- alluvial fertile soils, the region is under pressure from intense
east, while the other includes Kaziranga in Assam and stretches upto cultivation with high human densities. Sharing political boundaries
Meghalaya. While the former is supposed to be the only landscape in with Nepal, Bhutan, China, Myanmar and Bangladesh make
south-Asia sustaining the phenomenon of tigers living close to the conservation a challenging task in this landscape and the need for
timber line and predating upon mountain ungulates, the latter trans-boundary International cooperation an essential requirement for
encompasses the best preserved grassland habitat in the global tiger conservation success. With 6.8% of its total land area under protected
range (Wikramanayake et al. 1998). The region includes seven tiger area network, this zone incorporates the highest diversity of species
reserves, viz., Buxa in Northern Bengal, Manas, Kaziranga and Nameri known from India, albeit the faunal abundances are low due to a high
in Assam, Pakke and Namdapha in Arunachal Pradesh and Dampa in dependence of the local communities on bush-meat for subsistence
Mizoram. Several National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries, Reserved Forests and cultural reasons. Much of the prey is depleted in these forests as
and sacred groves are scattered across the landscape making it the the hunter-gatherer tribes are efficient hunters and depend a lot on
largest connected forest landscape in India. Currently tiger occupancy wild game for subsistence (Aiyadurai 2007). In addition, in recent
was recorded from an area of 4,565 km2 of forests within the years, most north-eastern states have been sites of intense political
Brahmaputra Valley and the North East Hills landscape, with an unrest resulting in differential development between states and within
estimated population of about 143 (113 to 172) tigers. This area is different regions of individual States.
recognised with high species diversity, high levels of endemism,
taxonomic uniqueness of species, serious habitat loss and threatened
status of the floral and faunal diversity of the area.

242 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.1:
Habitat Connectivity in
North-Eastern Hills and
Brahmaputra
Landscape

NORTH-EAST LANDSCAPE 243

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS

This landscape holds the largest tiger Figure 4.2:

population in the North-Eastern region Least Cost Pathway
consisting of about 125 tigers. The major corridor for Tiger
source population of tigers in this landscape movement between
are in Kaziranga and Pakke in India and Kaziranga-Itanagar WLS
dispersing tigers from Bhutan and Myanmar. Corridor overlaid with
Kaziranga Tiger Reserve covers an area of village map (the village
1,033 km2 and includes the 859 km2 Kaziranga numbers are
referenced in Table 4.1)
National Park, 44 km2 Burachapori and 70 km2
Laokhowa Wildlife Sanctuaries. The National
Park is located in Nagaon, Golaghat and
Sonitpur districts, bounded in the north by the
Brahmaputra and to the south, by the Karbi-
Anglong Hills. It is connected to the southern
parts of the North East Landscape via the
Karbi-Anglong Hills, for which it acts as a
major source. Further, Kaziranga is connected
through the Karbi-Anglong Hills, to Intanki in
the south. National Highway 37 separates it
from the Karbi-Anglong hills where about 150
villages are located along this road, within the
zone of influence of the Reserve. This
connectivity through Karbi-Anglong is crucial
for dispersal of tigers from their source
population in Kaziranga. Kaziranga has lost
its connectivity to the north (to Pakke) due to
intensive agriculture on northern banks of the
River Brahmaputra. The Kaziranga tiger
population is contiguous with that of Orang
Wildlife Sanctuary connected through island
systems of the Brahmaputra. This is the single
largest population in the North East
Landscape consisting of about 125 tigers. The
Kaziranga population connects with Nameri
through riverine corridors which is an

244 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

important connectivity maintaining gene flow between the plains and due to existence of political unrest in the Karbi region. Intanki National
the hill population of tigers (in Arunachal Pradesh). This region being Park is also connected westwards through forests upto Balphakram
extremely fertile is in demand for agriculture and the Protected Areas National Park. This landscape has contiguous forest across the
are increasingly becoming isolated islands. In light of this the international border with Myanmar. The weak links in this landscape
connectivity with Nameri in the North, Karbi Anglong in the South as are the forests in the districts of Mon, Mokok Chung, Tuensang,
well as the riverine islands, "stepping stones" through Laokhowa and Zuheboto, Wokha, and Pekh in the east. The landscape between
Burachapori Wildlife Sanctuaries to Orang form the crucial elements for Balphakram National Park and Intaki National Park through the
targeting conservation efforts. Large mammals from Kaziranga are also districts of Karbi-Anglong, West Khasi Hills, East Khasi Hills and East
known to move between Karbi-Anglong hills and the Tiger Reserve, and West Garo Hills is fragmented.
although protection of dispersing and migrating individuals is difficult

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Assam Lakhimpur Bihpuria Merbeel 142 851 174 934
2 Bihpuria Harmutty Gaon 314 1760 470 2255
3 Bihpuria Pachoni Bogori 21 110 55 266
4 Bihpuria Lakhonabari 63 351 77 381
5 Bihpuria Merbeel Dighali 46 302 46 258
6 Bihpuria Aunishbari 8/11 201 1151 236 1221
7 Bihpuria Parbotipur Gaon 41 253 46 243
8 Bihpuria Bangalmora Grazing Ground 520 2719 971 4857
9 Bihpuria Parbotipur N.C. 664 3236 511 2289
10 Narayanpur Pithaguri No.4 55 334 57 284
11 Narayanpur Pithaguri No.2 100 470 38 179
12 Bihpuria Bango Gaon 213 1232 205 1094
13 Narayanpur Pithaguri No.1 35 229 53 266
14 Bihpuria Dongibeel 255 1418 385 1966
15 North Lakhimpur Merbeel Gt. No. 81/78 NA NA NA NA
Table 4.1: 16 Bihpuria Laholial Gaon 65 373 78 384
Villages within the Least 17 Bihpuria Bangaligaon 175 1005 272 1405
Cost Pathway Corridor
18 North Lakhimpur Harmutty Gt. No.95 F.C. NA NA NA NA
between Kaziranga-
Itanagar WLS as shown 19 Bihpuria Chichapathar 234 1196 267 1282
in Fig. 4.2 20 Bihpuria Kandali Gaon 59 321 77 395

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 245

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
21 North Lakhimpur Rajgarh NA NA 276 1277
22 North Lakhimpur Holmari Grant No.65/68 NA NA NA NA
23 North Lakhimpur Pithaguri No.5 NA NA NA NA
24 North Lakhimpur Holmari Grant No.80 Fs NA NA NA NA
25 North Lakhimpur Hoimari No.79/87 Nlr NA NA NA NA
26 North Lakhimpur Gerelua NA NA NA NA.
27 Bihpuria Kalabil Mornoi Nepali 271 1356 254 1186
28 Bihpuria Mornoi Gaon 371 2067 526 2773
29 Bihpuria Keyamora 263 1423 289 1493
30 Bihpuria Chintaoligaon 40 227 43 190
31 Bihpuria Santapur Gaon 171 907 247 1218
32 Bihpuria Bihpuria NA NA NA NA
33 Bihpuria Gondhia Gaon No.2 55 323 69 366
34 Bihpuria Gondhia Gaon 75 413 Na Na
35 Bihpuria Pokadol Grant 19 116 17 90
36 Bihpuria Bihpuria Gaon 52 253 68 316
37 Bihpuria Bengenati Grant 93 506 115 548
38 Bihpuria Modhupur 12 71 15 71
39 Bihpuria Pokadol Pathar 70 429 97 507
40 Bihpuria Bangaligaon No.2 9 42 3 9
41 Bihpuria Nepali Gaon 123 628 150 645
42 Bihpuria Arunachal 84 501 104 491
43 Bihpuria Japjup 49 266 60 264
44 Bihpuria Badati Jamuguri 75 369 101 492
45 Bihpuria Kenduguri 143 705 388 1721
46 Bihpuria Badati Miri 260 1810 300 1775
47 Narayanpur Mazor Chapori 104 755 129 744
48 Narayanpur Sonaribari Block 3 41 279 4 19
49 Narayanpur Sonaribari Block 2 6 41 50 363
50 Narayanpur Dhanguloi Pathar 68 492 10 44

246 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
51 Narayanpur Sonaribari Block 1 3 10 18 110
52 Narayanpur Sonaribari 3 17 Na Na
53 Narayanpur Dikrongmukh 11 93 35 222
54 Narayanpur Chayang N.c. 44 344 64 401
55 Narayanpur Borbil 50 393 98 725
56 Narayanpur Banornlukh N.c. 33 268 49 379
57 Narayanpur Borbil Mazgaon 60 477 0 0
58 Narayanpur Kongbong N.c. 21 174 42 258
59 Narayanpur Bothakhona No.2 58 482 84 548
60 Narayanpur Borbeel N.c. 30 276 21 183
61 Narayanpur Jamuguri 141 898 59 330
62 Narayanpur Borati N.c. 66 573 58 394
63 Narayanpur Atua Chapori 5 48 7 54
64 North Lakhimpur Kandali Pathar Na Na Na Na
65 North Lakhimpur Kachikata Pathar Na Na Na Na
66 North Lakhimpur Meromukh N.c. Na Na Na Na
67 North Lakhimpur Patri N.c. Na Na Na Na
68 Golaghat Khumtai Alani Chapori 214 1143 230 1115
69 Bokakhat Mariahola 10 58 28 200
70 Bokakhat Dighali Ati 64 353 85 463
71 Bokakhat Bezgaon 3 21 66 329
72 Golaghat Gahorighat P.G.R. NA NA NA NA
73 Golaghat Namghuria Gaon NA NA NA NA
74 Golaghat Dadhora Gaon NA NA NA NA
75 Golaghat Sakala Satra NA NA NA NA
76 Golaghat Dalaijarani NA NA NA NA
77 Golaghat Lohkor Pathar Chapori NA NA NA NA
78 Golaghat Phalengi NA NA NA NA
79 Golaghat Gatanga Chapori NA NA NA NA
80 Golaghat Barfakua NA NA NA NA

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 247

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
81 Golaghat Rangamuri NA NA NA NA
82 Golaghat Namati NA NA 150 786
83 Golaghat Hutar Gaon NA NA NA NA
84 Golaghat Bakuli Chapori No.2 NA NA NA NA
85 Golaghat Majdolapa NA NA NA NA
86 Golaghat Bakuli Chapori No.1 NA NA NA NA
87 Golaghat Bhalukaguri NA NA NA NA
88 Golaghat Borbali NA NA 230 1105
89 Golaghat Chowguri Chapori NA NA NA NA
90 Golaghat Nowbhangi NA NA NA NA
91 Golaghat Bamungaon N.C. NA NA NA NA
92 Golaghat Bilotia Gaon NA NA NA NA
93 Bokakhat Jogania Ati 107 512 137 625
94 Bokakhat Palashguri 142 805 241 1221
95 Golaghat Bohikhowa NA NA NA NA

Kaziranga-Itanagar WLS Corridor

2
Habitat size 155799 Km
Source Population Kaziranga
2
Size of Source 106 (81-131) tigers in 800 Km
Protected Areas Kaziranga TR
Itanagar WLS
Corridors Kaziranga TR-Itanagar WLS Corridor

248 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.3:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Kaziranga-
Itanagar WLS

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 249

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.4:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kaziranga-
Itanagar WLS
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

250 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.5:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Kaziranga-Karbi-
Anlong Corridor
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 4.2)

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 251

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Kaziranga-Karbi-Anglong Corridor

Habitat size 155799 Km2

Source Population Kaziranga
2
Size of Source 106 (81-131) tigers in 800 Km
Protected Areas Kaziranga TR
Karbi-Anglong WLS
Corridors Kaziranga-Karbi Anglong1
Kaziranga-Karbi Anglong2

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Assam Karbi Anglong Bokajan NA NA NA NA
2 Golaghat Bokakhat Haladhibari 76 389 84 413
3 Nagaon Kaliabor Deopani 80 480 155 832
4 Nagaon Kaliabor Bandardubi 149 1009 224 1286
5 Nagaon Kaliabor Kalapanimukh 7 35 8 46
6 Nagaon Kaliabor Kanchanjuri 82 425 59 248
7 Nagaon Kaliabor Silimkhowa 75 378 117 619
8 Nagaon Kaliabor Injaygaon 17 105 25 128
9 Nagaon Kaliabor Rangagara 2 14 189 975 Table 4.2: Villages
within the Least Cost
10 Nagaon Kaliabor Krogaon 45 236 NA NA Pathway Corridor
11 Nagaon Kaliabor Bhokuamari 261 1621 391 2169 between Kaziranga-
Karbianlong as shown
12 Karbi Anglong Diphu Hora Ghat NA NA NA NA
in Fig. 4.5

252 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.6:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Kaziranga-
Karbi-Anglong

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 253

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.7:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kaziranga-
Karbi-Anglong
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

254 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.8.:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Kaziranga- Nameri
Corridor overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 4.3)

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 255

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Table 4.3:
Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total
Household Population Household Population Villages within the
Least Cost Pathway
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
Corridor between
33 Assam Nagaon Kaliabor Hatimura No.2 39 167 53 227 Kaziranga- Nameri as
shown in Fig. 4.8
34 Kaliabor Joysagar No.2 42 211 37 177
35 Kaliabor Kamakhyagaon 264 1153 321 1379
36 Nagaon Kurchimari NA NA NA NA
37 Nagaon Bihdubi No.2 NA NA NA NA
38 Nagaon Silikhaguri NA NA NA NA
39 Kaliabor Bhokuamari 261 1621 391 2169
40 Sonitpur Chariduar Charduar 315 1516 620 4150
41 Na-Duar Bardikarai No.2 359 2048 403 2083
42 Sonitpur Bardikarai Balichapari NA NA NA NA
43 Chariduar Berajon 119 627 255 1299
44 Na-Duar Purani Bardikarai 41 260 91 462
45 Na-Duar Bardikarai Miri Gaon 175 1111 212 1116
46 Na-Duar Gorbil 130 810 150 752
47 Na-Duar Patgaon N.C. 44 273 63 319
48 Na-Duar Bamun Gaon 116 663 Na Na
49 Na-Duar Nabil 320 1669 421 1891
50 Na-Duar Bagabil 217 1106 245 1110
51 Na-Duar Tarajan 17 95 Na Na
52 Chariduar Goraligaon 65 365 107 550
53 Na-Duar Chamdhara 106 540 108 512
54 Chariduar Tinigharia Miri 127 731 156 781
55 Tezpur Tengabasti 214 1166 324 1647
56 Chariduar Kekokali Bangali 38 211 53 277
57 Na-Duar Karaiani Chapari 523 3161 752 4098
58 Chariduar Kekokali Miri 45 243 62 281
59 Chariduar Singatali 570 2997 498 2473
60 Chariduar Rajgarh 233 1213 276 1277
61 Na-Duar Ghahi Bezgaon 40 207 79 341
62 Chariduar Karaibari 52 313 42 195

256 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
63 Sonitpur Kalabari Gaon NA NA NA NA
64 Sonitpur Tanbhangi Pathar NA NA NA NA
65 Sonitpur Baligaon N.C. NA NA NA NA
66 Sonitpur Miri Pathar No.2 NA NA NA NA
67 Sonitpur Bokagaon N.C. NA NA NA NA
68 Sonitpur Bormata NA NA NA NA
69 Sonitpur Dafalagarh NA NA NA NA
70 Sonitpur Mahajan Chapari NA NA NA NA
71 Sonitpur Bharali Chapari N.C. NA NA NA NA
72 Na-Duar Bharali Chapari 76 408 117 613
73 Chariduar Borghat Gaon 411 2322 657 3960
74 Na-Duar Goalgaon 92 490 486 2324
75 Na-Duar Chankighat Block 64 329 190 980
76 Chariduar Karkani 380 2365 405 2113
77 Chariduar Chamdhara 307 1865 108 512
78 Chariduar Bihiagaon 129 734 149 775
79 Tezpur Gorsinga Bihia 292 1773 397 2162
80 Tezpur Alisinga 75 400 16 70
81 Sonitpur Singrimari Gaon NA NA NA NA
82 Sonitpur Balosutigaon NA NA NA NA
83 Sonitpur Jowani NA NA NA NA
84 Tezpur Marisuti N.c. 28 175 33 210
85 Tezpur Karaiani Nepali 347 2207 540 2880
86 Sonitpur Makua N.C. NA NA NA NA
87 Sonitpur Gataimara N.C. NA NA NA NA
88 Sonitpur Gataimara NA NA NA NA
89 Sonitpur Bhojmari NA NA NA NA
90 Sonitpur Chiruani Chapari Pgr NA NA NA NA
91 Sonitpur Gorsinga Biching N.C. NA NA NA NA
92 Sonitpur Karaiani Nepali N.C. NA NA NA NA

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 257

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
93 Sonitpur Tengakhuti NA NA NA NA
94 Sonitpur Jorgarh N.C. NA NA NA NA
95 Sonitpur Chiruani N.C. NA NA NA NA
96 Sonitpur Rabarbari NA NA NA NA

Figure 4.9:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
Kaziranga-Nameri Corridor links within the Least
2
Cost Pathway corridor
Habitat size 155799 Km connecting Kaziranga-
Source Population Kaziranga Nameri
Size of Source 106 (81-131) tigers in
2
800 Km
Protected Areas Kaziranga TR
Nameri TR
Corridors Kaziranga-Nameri1
Kaziranga-Nameri2

258 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.10:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kaziranga-
Nameri landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 259

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.11:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Kaziranga- Orang
Corridor overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 4.4)

260 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Assam Nagaon Kaliabor Bhokuamari 261 1621 391 2169
2 Kaliabor Hatimura No.2 39 167 53 227
3 Kaliabor Hatimura No.1 61 298 38 185
4 Kaliabor Dakhinpat 169 750 208 934
5 Kaliabor Sonarigaon 105 511 Na Na
6 Kaliabor Joysagar No.2 42 211 37 177
7 Kaliabor Kamakhyagaon 264 1153 321 1379
8 Kaliabor Bihdubi No.1 129 561 136 552
9 Kaliabor Bhurbandha No.2 174 894 283 1409
10 Kaliabor Silghat Gaon 186 969 229 1029
11 Kaliabor Bihdubi No.3 18 98 68 381
12 Kaliabor Samdhora 326 1683 368 1492
13 Nagaon Bhurbondha N.C. NA NA NA NA
14 Kaliabor Gakhirakhati No.4 146 977 142 725
15 Rupahi Bogamukh No.3 4 27 41 233
16 Nagaon Kalangmukh P.G.R. NA NA NA NA
17 Nagaon Jamuguri No.1 NA NA NA NA
18 Nagaon Deochur No.1 NA NA NA NA
19 Nagaon Barghop No.1 NA NA NA NA
20 Nagaon Kurchimari NA NA NA NA
21 Nagaon Bihdubi No.2 NA NA NA NA
22 Nagaon Silikhaguri NA NA NA NA
23 Nagaon Saguri NA NA NA NA
24 Nagaon Joysagar No.1 NA NA NA NA
25 Kaliabor Bhokuamari 261 1621 391 2169
Table 4.4:
26 Sonitpur Dhekiajuli Nichalamari Chapari 168 888 210 1074
Villages within the Least
27 Sonitpur Borbhagia NA NA NA NA
Cost Pathway Corridor
between Kaziranga- 28 Sonitpur Sishuati NA NA NA NA
Orang as shown in 29 Sonitpur Kochumara Chapari NA NA NA NA
Fig. 4.11
30 Tezpur Marisuti N.C. 28 175 33 210

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 261

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
31 Sonitpur Tezpur Rajbhoral 287 1719 455 2378
32 Tezpur Bhomoraguri 321 1930 226 1150
33 Dhekiajuli Belsiri Chapori N.C. 1 4 8 43
34 Sonitpur Hatibari Gaon NA NA NA NA
35 Sonitpur Kaniya Tapu NA NA NA NA
36 Sonitpur Borsola Pgr NA NA NA NA
37 Sonitpur Chiruani N.C. NA NA NA NA
38 Sonitpur Rabarbari NA NA NA NA
39 Sonitpur Bihdubi No.2 NA NA NA NA
40 Sonitpur Sutartapa NA NA NA NA
41 Sonitpur Dhakal Tapu NA NA NA NA
42 Sonitpur Kosmara Pgr NA NA NA NA
43 Sonitpur Dhania NA NA NA NA
44 Sonitpur Belsiri Chapori NA NA NA NA
45 Sonitpur Arna Chapori NA NA NA NA
46 Sonitpur Batulibil NA NA NA NA

Kaziranga-Orang Corridor

Habitat size 155799 Km2

Source Population Kaziranga
Size of Source 106 (81-131) tigers in 800 Km2
Protected Areas Kaziranga TR
Orang NP
Corridors KazirangaTR-Orang NP Corridor

262 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.12:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Kaziranga-
Orang

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 263

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.13:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kaziranga-
Orang landscape in the
year 1992 and 2012

264 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.14:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Kaziranga-Papumpare
Corridor overlaid with
village map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 5)

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 265

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No (in

Household Population hactares)
1 Assam Sonitpur Biswanath Bihmari N.C.(Part) 129 696 136.00
2 Sonitpur Karibill Bangali NA NA NA
3 Biswanath Bihmari 263 1509 136.00
4 Biswanath Lalpukhuri 118 581 241.00
5 Sonitpur North Guhati NA NA NA
6 Sonitpur Karibill Gaon NA NA NA
7 Sonitpur Dullung N.C. NA NA NA
8 Sonitpur Takawbari Gaon NA NA NA
9 Sonitpur Bholuadanga NA NA NA
10 Sonitpur Karibill Chapari NA NA NA
11 Biswanath Barajuli T.e. 200 1040 233.00
12 Biswanath Nashbar 313 1545 265.00
13 Biswanath Bedeti Pathar 81 434 164.00
14 Biswanath Barajuli Pathar 63 286 141.00
15 Biswanath Barajuli Gaon (part) 207 1093 180.00
16 Biswanath Barajuli Nepali 258 1200 253.00
17 Sonitpur Rangajan NA NA NA
18 Sonitpur Leptapara NA NA NA
19 Biswanath Batiamari N.c.2 153 815 220.00
20 Biswanath Batiamari Pgr (part) 98 514 172.00
21 Biswanath Batiamari N.c.3 155 814 172.00
22 Biswanath Batiamari N.c.5 85 397 145.00
23 Biswanath Roumari Gaon 65 326 87.00 Table 4.5:
24 Sonitpur Burai N.C. NA NA NA Villages within the
25 Sonitpur Batiamari N.C.1 NA NA NA Least Cost Pathway
Corridor between
26 Sonitpur Barhatiguri NA NA NA Kaziranga-Papumpare
27 Sonitpur Buraight Lower NA NA NA as shown in Fig. 4.14

266 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.15:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Kaziranga-
Papumpare

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 267

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

in Assam covers an area of 7,200 km2. Manas Tiger Reserve was

camera trapped and tiger density is estimated to be 1.8 tiger per 100
km2. However, the region has higher potential and is on its path to
recovery. With control of poaching of prey, tiger densities are likely to
increase substantially, especially in the southern parts of Manas.

Figure 4.16:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kaziranga-
Papumpare landscape
in the year 1992 and
2012

Manas Tiger Reserve spans across the districts of Kokrajhar,

Bongaigaon, Barpeta, Nalbari, Kamrup and Darrang in north-west
Asaam, covering an area of 2,837 km2 of which 470 km2 is designated
as the core area. To the north, it is separated from the Royal Manas
National Park of Bhutan by River Manas and its tributaries- Beki and
Hakua; while to the west, it is separated from the Buxa Tiger Reserve of
West Bengal by River Sankosh. Around 62 villages are located within
two kilometres of the Reserve boundary between rivers Sankosh and Kaziranga-Papumpare Corridor
Dhansiri. The region is affected by high levels of extremist activities, Habitat size 155799 Km
2

thus making conservation and scientific monitoring in the area a

Source Population Kaziranga
challenge. The Reserve Ripu Chirang Elephant Reserve within the
Bhutan Biological Conservation Complex, in Bhutan is connected with Size of Source 106 (81-131) tigers in 800 Km2
the forests of Buxa in West Bengal, thus making a large transboundary Protected Areas Kaziranga
conservation area. The entire area inclusive of the Bor Nadi Sanctuary Corridors Kaziranga-Papumpare Corridor

268 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.17:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Manas Corridor overlaid
with village map (the
village numbers are
referenced in Table 4.6)

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 269

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 Assam Darrang Harisinga Bhutijhar N.c. 37 261 47 268
2 Harisinga Newli No.1 9 59 8 33
3 Darrang Chamrang N.C. NA NA NA NA
4 Darrang Newli Block N.C. NA NA NA NA
5 Darrang Sagunbari N.C. NA NA NA NA
6 Darrang Suklai Khuti Bagan N.C. NA NA NA NA
7 Nalbari Baska Dihira 136 794 219 1240
8 Tamulpur Goibari 814 4185 811 4200
9 Baska Madhupur 163 874 425 2275 Table 4.6.

10 Nalbari Angarkata P.G.R. NA NA NA NA Villages within the Least

Cost Pathway Corridor
11 Nalbari Dugapur NA NA 354 1484 between Manas as
12 Nalbari Balabari (Part) NA NA NA NA shown in Fig. 4.17

Manas Corridor

Habitat size 334 Km2

Source Population Manas-Buxa
2
Size of Source 9+ in 1349 Km
Protected Areas Manas TR
Buxa TR
Corridors Manas-Buxa Corridor

270 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.18:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Manas

Paneri
Tamulpur

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 271

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 19.
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Manas
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

272 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.20:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Paake-Nameri-Sonai-
Rupai-Manas Corridor
overlaid with village
map (the village
numbers are
referenced in Table 4.7)

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 273

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Table 4.7.
Village_ID State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total
Household Population Household Population Villages within the
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011) Least Cost Pathway
Corridor between
1 ASSAM DARRANG UDALGURI No.1 Dhansiri T.E. 512 2622 NA NA Paake-
2 DARRANG HARISINGA Khairabari Grant 35 137 NA NA Nameri_Sonai_Rupai-
Manas as shown in
3 DARRANG NA NA NA NA NA NA Fig. 4.20

Paake-Nameri-Sonai-Rupai-Manas Corridor Figure 4.21:

Habitat size 155799 Km

2 Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
Source Population Pakke-Nameri
links within the Least
2
Size of Source 9(7-11) tigers in 1089 Km Cost Pathway corridor
Protected Areas Pakke TR connecting Paake-
Nameri-Sonai-Rupai-
Nameri TR
Manas
Sonai-Rupai WLS
Manas TR
Corridors Nameri TR-Sonai-Rupai WLS
Sonai-Rupai WLS- Manas TR

274 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.22:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Paake-
Nameri_Sonai_Rupai-
Manas landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

Nameri Tiger Reserve is located in Sonitpur and Tezpur districts of of tigers, the depletion of prey by subsistence poaching as well as other
north-east Assam. It is contiguous with Pakke Tiger Reserve of anthropogenic disturbances likely results in depressed tiger
Arunachal Pradesh to its north and covers an area of 344 km2 of which populations. Its connectivity with Kaziranga is important and needs
200 km2 forms the core demarcated by Rivers Bhoreli and Bordikarai. policy and managerial inputs for its continued viability. This complex
Thirteen villages are located in the reserve of which eight are forest may further be connected to the Sonai Rupai Wildlife Sanctuary in
villages with predominantly tribal population. The population of tigers Assam and the greater forest complex of Arunachal Pradesh, that
is small (about 9) and is shared with Pakke. Though the area has provides connectivity, although with high hunting pressures, to the
potential for higher densities and ability to sustain a larger population forests further east into Namdapha, Intanki and maybe even Myanmar.

KAZIRANGA TR WITH OTHER PROTECTED AREAS 275

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

DIBRU SAIKHOWA-D'ERING-MEHAO, KAMLANG AND KANE WLS-

TALE VALLEY WLS
The largest contiguous forested region in Figure 4.23:
this landscape is over 136,000 km2. This Least Cost Pathway
landscape unit commences in the north- corridor for Tiger
west from Pakke Tiger Reserve through the movement between
forests of Palia, Tale Valley, Mouling and Dibru Saikhowa-
Dr. D'Ering Sanctuaries into Dibang D'Ering-Mehao-
National Park and upto Namdapha Tiger Kamlang Corridor
Reserve in the east. The landscape overlaid with village
continues south through some degraded map
areas into Intanki National Park, and
further South to Dampa Tiger Reserve and
Blue Mountain National Park.
Pakke-Nameri landscape includes parts of
the Sessa orchid Wildlife Sanctuary in
Kameng district, Eagle Nest Wildlife
Sanctuary, Pakke Tiger Reserve, parts of
Nameri Tiger Reserve in Assam and
continues via the forests of Tale Valley in
to lower Subansiri to D'Ering Memorial
Wildlife Sanctuary in East Siang upto
Namdapha Tiger Reserve. The largest
tiger population of Arunachal Pradesh is
within pockets of this landscape. Tiger
population of Pakke is shared with that of
Nameri Tiger Reserve (Assam) and was
estimated to be around 9 tigers.
The presence of Dipterocarp forests in this
region along with the high levels of
hunting, result in low abundances of prey
which subsequently affect tiger
abundances. Thus, despite the availability
of vast forested areas in this zone, tiger
abundances are low. The low- land forest
and hill forest are connected within
Arunachal Pradesh and with Assam.

276 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.24:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Dibru
Saikhowa-D'Ering-
Mehao-Kamlang

Dibru Saikhowa-Ering-Mehao Corridor

2
Habitat size 155799 Km
Source Population Arunachal Pradesh-Bhutan
Size of Source NA
Protected Areas Dibru-Saikhowa NP
D'Ering Memorial WLS
Mehao WLS
Corridors Dibru-Saikhowa NP-D'Ering Memorial WLS
D'Ering Memorial WLS-Mehao WLS

DIBRU SAIKHOWA-D'ERING-MEHAO, KAMLANG AND KANE WLS-TALE VALLEY WLS 277

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.25:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Dibru
Saikhowa-Ering-Mehao
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

278 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.26:
Least Cost Pathway
corridor for Tiger
movement between
Kane WLS-Tale Valley
WLS Corridor overlaid
with village map

DIBRU SAIKHOWA-D'ERING-MEHAO, KAMLANG AND KANE WLS-TALE VALLEY WLS 279

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.27:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Kane WLS-
Tale Valley WLS

Kane WLS-Tale Valley WLS Corridor

Habitat size 155799 Km2

Source Population Arunachal Pradesh-Bhutan
Size of Source NA
Protected Areas Kane WLS
Tale WLS
Corridors Kane WLS-Tale WLS

280 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.28:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Kane WLS-
Tale Valley WLS
landscape in the year
1992 and 2012

DIBRU SAIKHOWA-D'ERING-MEHAO, KAMLANG AND KANE WLS-TALE VALLEY WLS 281

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

BUXA-JALDAPARA

Buxa, is located in the Alipurduar sub- Figure 4.29:

division of Jalpaiguri district and covers an Least Cost Pathway
area of 760.87 km2. To the east, it is corridor for Tiger
separated from the Manas Tiger Reserve of movement between
Assam by River Sankosh while on the west, Buxa-Jaldapara
tea estates and the Joygaon-Nimti State Corridor overlaid with
Highway demarcate its boundaries. To the village map (the village
north of it is the international boundary with numbers are
Bhutan while on the south a mosaic of referenced in Table 4.8)
agricultural land, tea estates and the
National Highway 31C are located. The
Reserve has 37 forest villages while 7000-
8000 pilgrims visit the Mahakal Temple,
located within the Reserve, in March each
year. The other factors adding to existing
disturbance levels in the area include
existence of a number of PWD roads, a
National Highway and a meter gauge
railway line from Damanpur to Hasimara.
Until 1996, the area was also mined for
dolomite, post which a stay order was
passed on mining activities within the Park
by the State High Court.
Buxa Tiger Reserve has a weak connectivity
to Jaldapara National Park and Gorumara
Wildlife Sanctuary. While both these latter
areas are small with high levels of
disturbance (with about 32 Toto villages
around Jaldapara and 9 villages around
Gorumara), they still provide some
connectivity to tigers dispersing in this
landscape. To the east, Buxa has a good
connectivity with a much larger tiger
landscape of Manas, Bor Nadi Wildlife
Sanctuary in Assam and Royal Manas
National Park in Bhutan.

282 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Village State District Tehsil Village No of Total No of Total

_ID Household Population Household Population
(2001) (2001) (2011) (2011)
1 West Bengal Jalpaiguri Kalchini Dakshin Mandabari 516 2625 NA NA
2 Kalchini Nimtijhora Tea Garden 870 4266 NA NA
3 Alipurduar -I Kumarpara 345 1823 NA NA
4 Alipurduar -I Uttar Paitkapara 545 2716 NA NA
5 Alipurduar -I Paitkapara Tea Garden 905 4654 NA NA
6 Alipurduar -I Uttar Chakoakheti 241 1251 NA NA
7 Alipurduar -I Madhya Paitkapara 331 1712 NA NA
Table 4.8:
Villages within the Least
8 Alipurduar -I Mathura Tea Garden 1705 8472 NA NA
Cost Pathway Corridor 9 Kalchini Mechiabasti 966 5046 NA NA
between Buxa-
10 Kalchini Dalsingpara Tea Garden 2879 15752 NA NA
Jaldapara as shown in
Fig. 4.29 11 Kalchini Tosra Tea Garden 1007 5142 NA NA

Buxa-Jaldapara Corridor
2
Habitat size 9096 Km
Source Population Manas-Buxa
2
Size of Source 9+ in 1349 Km
Protected Areas Buxa TR
Jaldapara WLS
Corridors Buxa-Jaldapara1
Buxa-Jaldapara2

BUXA-JALDAPARA 283
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.30:
Potential bottlenecks,
obstacles and weak
links within the Least
Cost Pathway corridor
connecting Buxa-
Jaldapara

284 NORTH EAST

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Figure 4.31:
Human habitation as
depicted by nightlights
within the Buxa-
Jaldapara landscape in
the year 1992 and 2012

BUXA-JALDAPARA 285
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

LITERATURE CITED

Adriaensen F, Chardon JP, DeBlust G, Swinnen E, Villalba S, Gulinck H, and Matthysen E (2003). The application of 'least-cost' modelling as a functional landscape model. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 64, 233-247.
Banerjee K and Jhala YV (2012). Demographic parameters of endangered Asiatic lions (Panthera leo persica) in Gir Forests, India. Journal of Mammalogy, 93, 1420-1430.
Beier P, Majka DR, and Spencer WD (2008). Forks in the road: choices in procedures for designing wildland linkages. Conservation Biology, 22, 836–851.
Beier P and Noss RF (1998). Do habitat corridors provide connectivity? Conservation Biology, 12, 1241-1252.
Brown JH, Kodric-Brown A (1977). Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology, 58,445-449.
Calabrese JM and Fagan WF (2004). A comparison-shopper's guide to connectivity metrics. Frontiers of Ecology and Environment, 2,529-536.
Caro TM, and O'Doherty G (1999). On the use of surrogate species in conservation biology. Conservation Biology,13,805–814.
Chapron G, Miquelle DG, Lambert A, Goodrich JM, Legender S and Clobert J (2008).The impact on tigers of poaching versus prey depletion. Journal of Applied Ecology, 45, 1667–1674.
Chapron G. et al. (2014). Recovery of large carnivores in Europe's modern human-dominated landscapes. Science, 346, 1517–1519.
Check E (2006). Conservation biology: The tiger's retreat. Nature, 441, 927–930.
Clark W, Curlee AP and Reading RP (1996). Crafting effective solutions to the large carnivore conservation problem. Conservation Biology, 10, 940-948.
Compton B, Mc Garigal K., Cushman SA and Gamble L (2007). A resistant kernel model of connectivity for vernal pool breeding amphibians. Conservation Biology, 21, 788–799.
Crooks K (2002). Relative Sensitivities of Mammalian Carnivores to Habitat Fragmentation. Conservation Biology, 2, 488-502.
Crooks KR, Sanjayan M (2006). Connectivity conservation; Crooks KR, Sanjayan M, editors. Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University Press. 712 p.
Cushman SA and Lewis J (2010). Movement behavior explains genetic differentiation in American black bear. Landscape Ecology, 25, 1613–1625.
Cushman SA, Landguth EL (2010). Scale dependent inference in landscape genetics. Landscape Ecology, 25, 967–979.
Cushman SA, Raphael MG, Ruggiero LF, Shirk AS, Wasserman TN, O'Doherty EC (2011). Limiting factors and landscape connectivity: the American marten in the Rocky Mountains. Landscape
Ecology, 26,1137–1149.
Cushman SA, Schwartz MK, Hayden J, McKelvey KS (2006). Gene flow in complex landscapes: confronting models with data. American Naturalist,168,486–499.
Dinerstein E, Loucks C, Wikramanayake E, Ginsberg J, Sanderson E, Seidensticker J, Forrest J, Bryja G, Heydlauff A, Klenzendorf S, Leimgruber P, Mill J, O'Brien TG, Shrestha M, Simons R and Songer M
(2007). The fate of wild tigers. BioScience, 57, 508-514.
Dolrenry S, Stenglein J, Hazzah L, Lutz RS and Frank L (2014). A metapopulation approach to African lion (Panthera leo) conservation. PLOS one, 9, 2, e88081. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0088081
Fischer J and Lindenmayer DB (2002). Small patches can be valuable for biodiversity conservation: two case studies on birds in south eastern Australia. Biological Conservation, 106, 129 –136.
Forman RTT, Godron M (1986). Landscape ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York
Frankham R, Ballou JD and Briscoe D (2002). Introduction to Conservation Genetics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Gittleman JL, Funk SM, Macdonald DW and Wayne RK (2001). Carnivore conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 690 p. editors.
Gopal R, Qureshi Q, Bharadwaj M, Singh RKJ and Jhala YV (2010). Evaluating the status of the endangered tiger Panthera tigris and its prey in Panna Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh, India, Oryx, 44,
383–398.
Gopal, R, Y adav SP, Majumder A, and Areendran G. (Eds) (2014). Global Tiger Atlas. A collaborative compilation by Global Tiger Forum, WWF-India and Tiger Range Countries (pages 1-38)
Hanski I (1999). Metapopulation ecology. New York: Oxford University Press. 313 p.

286
 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Hanski I, Gilpin M, editors (1997). Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics and evolution. San Diego, California: Academic Press. 512 p.
Hanski I. and Ovaskainen O (2000). The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape. Nature, 404, 755 –758.
Hanski IA (1994). A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. Journal of Animal Ecology, 63, 151-162.
Harrison S (1991). Local extinction in a metapopulation context: an empirical evaluation. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 42, 73-88.
Inglis G and Underwood AJ (1992). Comments on Some Designs Proposed for Experiments on the Biological Importance of Corridors. Conservation Biology, 6, 581-586.
Jhala YV, Gopal R and Qureshi Q eds. (2008). Status of the tigers, co-predators, and prey in India. National Tiger Conservation Authority, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India,
New Delhi and Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun. TR08/001 pp164.http://oldwww.wii.gov.in/publications/statusof_tigers2008.pdf
Jhala YV, Qureshi Q and Gopal R (2011a). Can the abundance of tigers be assessed from their signs? Journal of Applied Ecology, 48, 14-24.
Karanth KU and Gopal R (2005). An ecology-based policy framework for human-tiger coexistence in India. Pages 373-387 in People and Wildlife: Conflict or Coexistence? (Editors: R. Woodroffe, S.
Thirgood and A. Rabinowitz). Cambridge University Press.
Kenney JS, Smith JLD, Starfield AM and McDougal CW (1995). The long term effects of tiger poaching on population viability. Conservation Biology, 9, 1127-1133.
Lambeck, RJ (1997). Focal species: a multi-species umbrella for nature conservation. Conservation Biology,11, 849–856.
Lindenmayer DB, and Fischer J (2003). Sound science or social hook – a response to Brooker's application of the focal species approach. Landscape and Urban Planning,62, 149–158.
Linkie M, Chapron G, Martyr DJ, Holden J and Leader-Williams N (2006). Assessing the viability of tiger subpopulations in a fragmented landscape. Journal of Applied Ecology, 43, 576-586.
Lowe, W. and Allendorf, F (2010). What can genetics tell us about population connectivity? Molecular Ecology 19, 3038–3051
McRae BH, Dickson BG, Keitt TH, and Shah VB (2008). Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. Ecology, 89, 2712–2724.
Moilanen A, Hanski I (2001). On the use of connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Oikos, 95,147–151. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2001.950116.x
Mondol S, Karanth KU, Ramakrishnan U (2009) Why the Indian Subcontinent Holds the Key to Global Tiger Recovery. PLoS Genet 5(8): e1000585. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000585
Narain S, Panwar HS, Gadgil M and Thapar V (2005). Joining the dots: The report of the Tiger Task Force.Project Tiger, Union Ministry of Environment and Forests, New Delhi.
Natural Areas Journal, 19,392-411.
Noss RF (1987). Corridors in real landscapes: a reply to Simberloff and Cox. Conservation Biology, 1, 159-164.
Noss, RF, Strittholt JR, Vance-Borland K, Carroll C, and Frost P (1999). A conservation plan for the Klamath-Siskiyou ecoregion.
Palmer SCF, Coulon A. Travis JMJ (2011). Introducing a “stochastic movement simulator” for estimating habitat connectivity. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2(3), 258-268.
Pascual-Hortal L and Saura S (2006). Comparison and development of newgraph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the prioritization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation.
Landscape Ecology, 21, 959–967.
Proctor MF, McLellan BN, Strobeck C and Barclay RMR (2005). Genetic analysis reveals demographic fragmentation of grizzly bears yielding vulnerably small populations. Proceedings of the Royal
Society B: Biological Sciences, 272, 2409-2416.
Purvis A, Agapow PM, Gittleman JL and Mace GM (2000). Non random Extinction and the Loss of Evolutionary History. Science, 14, 288, 328–330.
Rangarajan M (1996). Fencing the forest: conservation and ecological change in India's Central Provinces, 1860-1914.Oxford University Press, Delhi, India.
Rangarajan M (2006). India's wildlife history: an introduction. Permanent Black, New Delhi.
Rayfield BM, Fortin J and Fall A 2010. The sensitivity of least-cost habitat graphs to relative cost surface values. Landscape Ecology, 25, 519 – 532.

LITERATURE CITED 287

 CONNECTING TIGER POPULATIONS
FOR LONG-TERM CONSERVATION

Revilla E, Wiegand T (2008). Individual movement behavior, matrix heterogeneity, and the dynamics of spatially structured populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 105,
19120– 19125.
Sanderson E, Forrest J, Loucks C, Ginsberg J, Dinerstein E, Seidensticker J, Leimgruber P, Songer M, Heydlauff A, O'Brien T, Bryja G, Klenzendorf S and Wikramanayake E (2006). "Setting Priorities for
the Conservation and Recovery of Wild Tigers: 2005-2015." The Technical Assessment. WCS, WWF, Smithsonian, and NFWF-STF, New York – Washington, D.C.
Sanderson, EW, Jaiteh M, Levy MA, Redford KH, Wannebo AV, and Woolmer G (2002). The Human Footprint and The Last of the Wild. BioScience, 52(10), 891-904, http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-
3568(2002)052[0891:THFATL]2.0.CO;2
Sawyer H, Kauffman MJ, Nielson RM, (2009). Influence of well pad activity on winter habitat selection patterns of mule deer. Journal of Wildlife Management,73,1052–1061.
Simberloff, D (1998). Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: is single-species management passé in the landscape era? Biological Conservation, 83, 247–257.
Smith JLD (1993). The role of dispersal in structuring the Chitwan tiger population. Behaviour, 124, 165-195.
Spear SF, Balkenhol N, Fortin MJ, McRae BH, Scribner K (2010). Use of resistance surfaces for landscape genetic studies: considerations for parameterization and analysis. Molecular Ecology,19,
3576–3591.
Tilson RL and Seal US (1987). Tigers of the world. Park Ridge, New Jersey, Noyes Publications.
Tischendorf L, Fahrig L (2000). How should we measure landscape connectivity?.Landscape Ecology,15,633–641.doi:10.1023/A:1008177324187
Urban DL and Keitt T (2001). Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective.Ecology,82, 1205–1218
Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA. and Schick RS (2009). Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecological Letters,12,260–273.
Walston J, Robinson JG, Bennett EL, Breitenmoser U, et al. (2010). Bringing the tiger back from the brink – the six percent solution. PLoS Biology, 8, e1000485 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000485.
Wiens, JA, Hayward GD, Holthausen, RS. and Wisdom MJ (2008). Using surrogate species and groups for conservation planning and management. BioScience, 58, 241–252.
Wilcox BA and Murphy DB (1985). Conservation strategy: The effects of fragmentation on extinction. The American Naturalist, 125, 879-887.
Woodroffe R (2000). Predators and people: using human densities to interpret declines of large carnivores. Animal Conservation, 3, 165-173.
Woodroffe R and Ginsberg JR (1998). Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areas. Science, 280, 2126-2128.
Yumnam B, Jhala YV, Qureshi Q, Maldonado JE, Gopal R, Saini S, Srinivas Y, Fleischer, R. C (2014). Prioritizing Tiger Conservation through Landscape Genetics and Habitat Linkages. PLoS ONE 9(11):
e111207. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111207

288
Wildlife Institute of India